LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement/Kaul Seeks $28,000 Trillion in Damages
Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement

Kaul Seeks $28,000 Trillion in Damages

September 30, 2019 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

Kaul Seeks $28,000 Trillion in Damages
Richard Kaul, M.D. / Courtesy: Official Dr. Richard Kaul Blogsite
#americanmedicalassociationSecondary#northamericanspinesociety#richardkaul#ussupremecourt

A few days ago, Richard Kaul, M.D. informed us that the U.S. Supreme Court has docketed for consideration his writ of mandamus in the matter of Richard Arjun Kaul v Christopher J. Christie (16-CV-02364).

Kaul wants “$28,000 trillion” in financial damages resulting from what he calls the “illegal revocation” of his medical license by the state of New Jersey.

He is asking the Court to take up his lawsuit with 22 motions for summary judgement against former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, the New Jersey State Board of Medical Examiners, Warren Buffet, Greg Przybylski, M.D., the North American Spine Society, the American Medical Association, various insurance companies, educational institutions, health systems and journalists.

Kaul had his medical license revoked by the state of New Jersey in 2014. He then sued the defendants.

“Gross and Repeated Malpractice, Negligence, and Incompetence”

A U.S. Federal Judge, Kevin McNulty, dismissed the case, writing that the New Jersey State Board of Medical Examiners revoked Kaul’s license because they found that “Dr. Kaul’s performance of spine surgeries on 11 patients without proper training and experience constituted gross and repeated malpractice, negligence, and incompetence.” The Board further imposed the statutory maximum fine of $20,000 for each of the 15 counts of malpractice and misconduct charged, as well as attorneys’ fees and costs. All told, the Board imposed $475,422.32 in civil penalties, fees, and costs.

“Racketeering, Evidence Tampering, Perjury and Obstruction of Justice”

Kaul claims his evidence “proves that the defendants, a collection of influential and wealthy neurosurgeons, insurance companies and hospitals engaged in prolonged patterns of racketeering, evidence tampering, mail fraud, wire fraud, perjury and obstruction of justice. In addition to the defendants’ crimes, this case has exposed judicial corruption by the defendants of the district court judges, and led to the filing by Kaul, on April 4, 2019, of a lawsuit against Democratic Party Leader, Senator Charles E. Schumer, the judge’s brother-in-law, and others.”

Advertisement

Kaul’s email to us states other forms of relief sought in the case pertain to political campaign finance reform and a “Reformation of American Medical Boards.”

He says there are currently “over four hundred (400) physician suicides annually in the United States, with the majority being related to corruption within state medical boards and the for-profit Federation of State Medical Boards. Kaul and Dr. Arnold Feldman, an internationally recognized pioneer in minimally invasive spine surgery, will be initiating legal action against these entities to effectuate a change in the process of physician regulation in the United States, to mitigate the physician suicide epidemic.”

Next, the Supreme Court will determine if Kaul’s filing meets all the requirements for a hearing by the Court. We’ve been in touch with the Court and they promise to keep us posted.

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy