Roxanne Hawkins, et al. v. Kunal Ajmera, et al.

When the Supreme Court of a State upholds lower courts’ decisions to strike Plaintiffs’ Medical Expert and grant summary judgment to DefendantDoctors based thereon despite {i} “manufactured” (i.e., false) medical records being allowed into the case six days before trial, {ii} the “manufactured” medical records being verified by them countering the original hospital medical records acquired by Plaintiffs pursuant to statutory-mandated guidelines before proceeding to court, {iii} Plaintiffs’ expert’s rational refusal to attend a post-deadline deposition with the “manufactured” medical records he never reviewed prior to issuing his opinion, an opinion that relied 100% on the authentic hospital medical records provided to him over a year earlier, and {iv} the allowance of the lower state courts’ decisions to undermine the entire pre-litigationstatutory process in Maryland 1, hence enabling medical providers and their attorneys to cheat the process established to prevent frivolous litigation against medical professionals and enable due process and equal protection of the laws for victims of below-standard-of-care, has Petitioners’ due process and equal protection rights been denied. 1 Over half of the states in the country have similar conditions for proceeding legally against medical providers.