Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

sponsored by
News


Immunity issue spurs judge to delay Gage trial

Quackenbush had threatened to dismiss charges

U.S. District Judge Justin Quackenbush filed an order Wednesday to postpone the new trial of personal injury attorney Noel Gage, who is accused of conspiring with a network of doctors and lawyers to defraud clients and pad their own pockets.

Quackenbush said last week that he would drop the charges against Gage if the government did not offer immunity to Dr. Mark Kabins, a physician Gage's attorneys say could be a key witness. The U.S. Attorney's Office refused to grant immunity, but Quackenbush has yet to drop the charges against Gage.


Most Popular Stories
  • Three suspects arrested in shooting death of police officer
  • Three suspects arrested in shooting death of police officer
  • FATAL SHOOTING: Police again mourn comrade
  • NORM: Biden finds rank has its privileges
  • NORM: Walton: Coach deserved a punch
  • Two of three suspects in slaying of officer could face death penalty
  • DEADLY HOME INVASION: Police suspect link to family
  • Station Casinos posts $455 million third-quarter loss
  • Las Vegas police shoot at man fleeing after traffic stop
  • Las Vegas police shoot at man fleeing after traffic stop
  • UNLV sacks football coach Sanford
  • NORM: 'Girls Gone Wild' creator feels heat




  • The government filed a lengthy objection to Quackenbush's immunity request on Friday, the deadline he set for the offer to Kabins.

    Quackenbush indefinitely delayed the trial until he decides whether to drop the charges or support the government's request not to grant immunity.

    "Following the completion of briefing on the pending and any future motion, and argument, if requested, the court will set a new retrial date, if appropriate," Quackenbush wrote in his Wednesday order.

    Quackenbush declared a mistrial in April after the jury could not reach a verdict on the charges against Gage.

    Gage is accused of belonging to a tight crew of doctors and lawyers who inflated medical costs to boost the amount rendered in legal settlements. The doctors were protected by the attorneys from medical malpractice lawsuits, and the members of the network shared profits from the scheme, the government claims.

    Prior to Gage's trial, the government granted immunity to surgeons Dr. John Thalgott and Dr. Ben Venger, each of whom testified against Gage.

    Gage's attorneys believe Kabins' testimony will contradict that of Thalgott on a matter related to Gage's one-time client, Melodie Simon. Thalgott and Kabins performed a routine back surgery on Simon in 2000. After the operation, Simon began feeling weakness in her legs. Thalgott said that a sac protecting Simon's spine had been punctured at some point and that internal bleeding was causing the paralysis.

    Thalgott left for vacation the day after the surgery. The government claims it took Kabins 11 hours to perform emergency surgery to release the pressure in Simon's back.

    Thalgott testified that he, Kabins and Gage held a private meeting to discuss the case. They agreed to blame Simon's paralysis on the anesthesiologist.

    Rather than the $8 million to $12 million settlement Gage initially told Simon she could secure, she received $2.3 million. After attorney's fees and associated costs, she received $1.3 million.

    Thalgott indicated that Gage promised the physicians they would not be sued. The government claims such a promise was possible because they all belonged to the network. Gage's attorneys believe Kabins will testify that no such promise was made.

    Kabins requested immunity, meaning his statements could not be used against him at trial; the government could use Kabins' information only to further the investigation.

    Contact reporter Adrienne Packer at apacker@reviewjournal.com or 702-384-8710.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 4 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Dustin wrote on May 08, 2008 10:11 AM: delray,

    The judge said immunity or dismissal, but the prosecutors let him know the legal issues involved and why the felt they were legally entitled to refuse to grant immunity. The judge has to have a hearing on the issues before he dismisses the charges. Can't dismiss the case with pending legal issues.


    curious wrote on May 08, 2008 08:06 AM: The 9th Circuit just upheld a federal judge's decision that the US Attorney's office was guilty of "prosecutorial misconduct." No big surprise to the legal community. The case had to big dismissed due to their conduct. Now, they take on another federal judge. Brower, the "political buddy" of Ensign, who is our new US attorney, said he was "disappointed" with the decision of the 9th circuit. Perhaps,rather than continuing to make excuses for his office's legal blunders, he ought to take an active role in reviewing what these guys are doing. Perhaps, they ought to be a little concerned over the citizens whose rights they are abusing. Why are they so afraid of trying the Gage case if ALL the evidence is considered by the jury, instead of their cherry picked witnesses. What is it that they are so afraid of?? What is so bad about a fair trial?


    The Quack has Gage's back wrote on May 08, 2008 07:50 AM: The doctors were protected by the attorneys from medical malpractice lawsuits, and the members of the network shared profits from the scheme, the government claims.

    LOOKS LIKE THE JUDGE IS PROTECTING HIM TOO. Is this the only Judge involved?


    delray wrote on May 08, 2008 06:43 AM: what the hell is going on.. the judge said immunity or dismissal.. the government did not give immunity thus dismissal.. what is this judge doing??? dismiss the case