Schoolcraft v. The City Of New York et al

Filing 625

DECLARATION of Reply Declaration of Joshua Fitch in Support re: 559 MOTION for Attorney Fees , Costs and Disbursements.. Document filed by Adrian Schoolcraft. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex. A - note from Kin mar Lwin, # 2 Exhibit Ex. B - Portions of Patel Deposition, # 3 Exhibit Ex. C - Portions of Bernier Deposition, # 4 Exhibit Ex. D - note from Khuso Tariq, # 5 Exhibit Ex. E - Portions of Lwin Deposition, # 6 Exhibit Ex. F - Report of Frank Dowling, # 7 Exhibit Ex. G - Report of Tancredi, # 8 Exhibit Ex. H - Report of Levy, # 9 Exhibit Ex. I - Report of Lubit, # 10 Exhibit Ex. J - Portion of Sawyer Deposition, # 11 Exhibit Ex. K - Section of Hospital Chart, # 12 Exhibit Ex L - Section of Hospital Chart, # 13 Exhibit Ex. M - Sgt. Chu Summary, # 14 Exhibit Ex. N - Sgt. Chu Interview, # 15 Exhibit Ex. O - Portion of Isakov JPTO, # 16 Exhibit Ex. P - Portions of Lamstein Deposition, # 17 Exhibit Ex. Q - Various Emails to and from defense counsel (redacted), # 18 Exhibit Ex. R - Various Emails (redacted), # 19 Exhibit Ex. S - Paid invoices)(Fitch, Joshua)

Long Island Behavioral Medicine, PC
1727Veterans Memorial Hi^way - Suite 300
Islandia, NY 11749
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

i
!

I

September 18,2014

I

Robert Devfne, Esq.
Ivone, Devine & Jensen, LLP

!
]

I
I

2001 Marcus Avenue - SuitoNlOO

Lake Success, NY 11042
Dear Mr. Devine:

I

.1.

I

I have been asked by the firm of Ivone, Devine &Jenseiv LLP, attorneys

for Isak Isakov, M.D., to give my opinions with regard to the psychiatric care given to

Adrian SdioolcrafL a patient at Jamaica Hospital Medici Center. I have reviewed

multiple records including the Jamaica Hospital Medical Center chart, the depositions
ofvarious individuals including Adrian Schoolcraft, Dr. Aldana-Bemier andDr. Isakov,

the report of plaintiff's psychiatry expert. Dr. Roy Lubit, arid the Complaint in this
matter. After the review, I have come to the conclusion that the carerendered by Dr..

Isakov was excellent and conformed to good and accepted medical and psychiatric
practice.

2.

The grounds for my opinions ate set forth herein. The record of Jamaica

Hospital Mledical Center demonstrates that on the evening of 10/31/09, police officers
in the New York City Police Department brought the plaintiff Adrian Schoolcraft, age

I

34, also aNew York Qty police officer, to Jamaica Hospital Medical Center in
1

handcuff. Reportedly/ the police had gone to the patient's home requesting him to
come back to fhe precinct/ which he refused He' wentintohis apartment and refused to

obey the order of the police to openhis door. He eventually ran away and had to be
chased downand upon hiscapture/ wasbrou^t to themedical emergency room ofthe
hospital where he stayedimtil he was transferred tothe psychiatric emergency room on
11/2/09. He was seen by Dr. Aldana- Bemier/ an attending psychiatrist practicing at

that hospital on11/3/09. Dr. Aldana-Bemiet/ according to the record, wrote that the
patient was a danger to himself or others imd the patient was confined to the

psychiatric unit for treatment and observation. On the foflowing day, 11/4/09 the
patient was seen and evaluated byIsak Isakov, M.D./ also an att^ding psychiatrist who

practiced at Jamaica Hdspital. The patient refused to give Dr. Isakov information that
he requested in conducting a psychiatric assessment and refused to give Dr. Isakov an
authorization to speak to the psychologist of the New York City Police Department,

who had previously conducted a psychological evaluation and recommended tiiat the

patient beplaced ondesk duty andthat his gun be taken from him. Herefused togive
Dr.Isakov information as to fhereasonor reasons that hisgun was takenfromhim.

3.

A review of Ihe ho^ital record indicates that the patient was reported to

exhibit signs of paranoia, agitation, psychosis, anxiety and stress that he was unable to
deal with. He stated, in substance, that tiie police, includinghis superiorsin tiie Police

Department^ were outto get him. Heappeared suspicious and didnot cooperate with

Dr. Is^ov in providing him with answers to the questions tihat he asked, thereby

f
I

i
R
Q/'

I

making it diiEBcult to evaluate the veteions of the events. It was not possible at that time

for Dr. Isakov to determine if the r^orted fears that the department was out to get him

were true or if they were delusional. In addition/ it was reported that the patient had
acted bizarre/ was agitated/ paranoid and combative. The history was consistentwith

someone who was delusional or who was decompensating in die setting of severe/

I

catastrophic stress. It is my opinion that Dr. Isakovwas justified in making his dinical

I

judgment to continue the confinement of this patient under the circumstances that

i
i

||

existed at the time. He was justified in considering the information in the hospital

record/ includingstatements made by police office that the patient locked himself in
«

his apartmentand refused to open the door when the police directed himto do so; that
he ran awa^ from them and had to be chased down and put into handcuffs; and that the

I
p

patient/ himsdf a police officer/ had to be brought to the hospital

force/ arriving in

i
i

handcuffS/ at die hospital. Dr. Isakov had the right to consider evaluations by other

i

medical personnel and other psychiatrists with respect to their opinions regardingthis

I

patient. He had the lig^t to consider the fact that the patient refused to give him the

^

infoxmadon thatheneeded tomakehis evaluation. He had the rig^tto considerthe

I

i
I

fact that die patient was reported to be engaged izi bizarre conduct; emotionally
unstable; suspiciousand exhibitedpossible symptomsof psydiosis; appeared paranoid/
and acted paranoid/ making statementsthat the policewere out to get him. He had the
ri^t to consider his own observations of the patient and the fact tiiat the patientwould
not name a family member on that first day that Dr. Isakov saw him, who could confirm

I
I

I

that thepatientdid not havea past psychiatric history. It is my opinion that Dr. Isakov,
considering all tiie circumstances, including tiieentries in the record, was wdl justitied
and conformed to accepted medical and psychiatric practice in readting a dinical

judgment to keep the patient in the hospital for observation and treatment. This would
be a benefitto the patient if he was delusional' or if he was under severe stress to help
remove some of that stress, where he would be in a safe environinent with the hospital

staff caring for him and ready to intervene if necessary. In addition, there was the
opportunity to clarify further if he was delusional or reacting to severe stress and to

develop the proper treatm^t and supportplan to assist him in the hospital and after
discharge.

4.

It is my opinionfuxtiier that the bizarre conduct of the patient,hisrefusal

to cooperate with the psychiatrist evaluating himat the time, his symptoms of paranoia
and psychosis with statements demonstrating both conditions, as well as his

appearance ofbring-under stress andagitation, was conduct thatdemonstrated that this
patient was a danger to himself whidi authorizes his involuntary commitment under
Section 9:39 of the Mental Hygiene LawoftheState ofNewYork.
5.

I have treated hundreds of police officem with post-traumatic stress

disorder, depression^ and otherconditions related to theduties that police officers must

perform on the job. They are in a stressful environment and canbe called on to make
instantaneous decisions regarding life and death.

This stress can cause anxiety,

depression, agitation, suicidal thoughts and behaviors. In my opinion it would have

I
I
been a d^artuxe from good and accepted medical and psychiatric practice for Dr.

i

Isakov to discharge this patient There was no family member or oihor person known

ll

to Dr. Isakov, who' could give the patient the level of daily observation, support and
assistance available on an inpatient psychiatric unit

He lived alone.

He was

I

emotionally unstable at the time. V^th symptoms of paranoia and psychosis, the

Iji

dangertoanindividualifheweredischargedwouldbesignificant

i

6.

There wasno obligation on thepartof Dr. Isakov to interview every poUce

ofBcer whohad broughtthe patient to thehospital himself. He wasjustified inreading

|[
ll

the statements made policeofdc^s to othersas reflected bythe hospital record. The
patient refused to authorize Dr. Isakov to speak with the psychologist from the police

I

department who had recommended that Mr. Schoolcraft have his firearm taken from

K

him. The hospital record indicates thatasocialworker who was partofthe inpatient

^

evaluation and treatment te^ with Dr. Isakov contacted the police psychologist but
was given no information with regard to the patient. Dr. Isakov understandably

I

wanted to know the reason that fiie psychologist fdt that the patient should have his
fiieaim taken from him. Did she feel that there was a danger that he would use it on

I
^

I

himself, or others? Whenshesawthepatient,sherecommended thathe betreated for
the stress that he was under at the time. He did not do so. Dr. Isakov was in a position

atthe timewhere he was trying to evaluate whetherthe patienthad realistic complaints
ordehisional concerns. It is to thepatienfs interest under these circumstances, tobein
a safe environment, while all these issues are sorted out

I

I
I

7.

On November 5,2009 Dr. Isakov engaged in a conference with thefather

of the patient/ the patient/ and a representative from Internal Affairs from the Police
Department The patient did not appear as symptomatic that day as he had the
previous day. The patient's father confirmed that the patient did nothave a previous

psychiatric history on that day, as well. It was appropriate/ for the continuation of
psychiatric care for the patient/ particularly given the severe stress that hewas facing/ to
have the patient evaluated after hewould be discharged/ by a competent psychiatrist/
within a reasonably shcot time following discharge from the hospital. The patient was
told thatifhewould seea psychiatrist intheJamaica Hospital diniC/ within a short time
after discharge/ hewould bedischarged on11/5/09. The patient refused. However/ on

the following day, where an arrangement.was made for evaluation by a psychiatrist

shortiy after discharge/ infact the patient was discharged on that day, 11/6/09.
8.

In alb it is my opinion slated with reasonable medical certainty, as are all

the opinions e)qpressed above, that flie evaluatiorv care and treatment of Ibis patient by
Dr. Isakov conformed to good and accepted medical and psyduatric practice, and was

not acompetent producing cause of any injury or damage to the patient. With apatient

suffering from symptoms of stress, emotional instability/ paranoia, and psychosis, he
benefitted from continued confinement in the hospital with observation by trained

persoimd, so that he calmed down, gave Dr. Isakov the information he needed on the
second day under his care, had his fath&c present to confirm a negative psychiatric

history and provided support for the patient so that, with continued psychiatric care

availabte shortly after discharge^ Ihe hospitalization of this patient in the interim,

I
I'
'

benefitted him to a substantial degree.

9.

My curriculum vitae isattached.
Very truly yours,

I

i
i
i

I
i

I

I
I
I

ling, M.D.