Monday, December 7, 2009

Li v. Huffman et. al. Suffolk Superior Court, No.: 09-4982


Suffolk County Superior Court Civil Action No.: 09-4982
Plaintiff, )
V. )
Defendants. )



The Plaintiff, Yong Li (“Li”), hereby filed this complaint against the Defendants (DD. Huffman, Yaroshenko, Jabur, and Nyquist), four psychiatrists of Massachusetts General Hospital, for they branded the plaintiff delusional based on a sexual-harassment lawsuit against her ex-employer. The Defendants unfairly manipulated the way of mental evaluation and purposely induced the plaintiff into a civil commitment. Not only the Defendants wanted to gain a big payment from the plaintiff’s health insurance, but also they demeaned the plaintiff because of her race and her English language barrier. They rejected the plaintiff’s request for having a Mandarin psychiatrist to do evaluation before the first Roger hearing; they baselessly accused the plaintiff of being dangerous to others; they only adopted Caucasian doctor’s opinion, and ignored the opinions from a Mandarin psychiatrist who indicated that the plaintiff was not delusional; they forced the plaintiff to take mood-regulating pills in order to erase the intention of practicing the right to sue; and they accused the plaintiff of discriminating against others when the plaintiff asked for having an Africa-American nurse into the treatment team.

Count I: Civil Conspiracy
Count II: Tortious Interference with Advantageous Relationship and
Count III: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress


1. The Plaintiff, Yong Li (“Li”), was a software engineer and had worked in Raytheon Company for many years.

2. The Defendant Jeff C. Huffman (“Huffman”) was an attend psychiatrist in the Massachusetts General Hospital (“MGH”).

3. The defendant Marina V. Yaroshenko (“Yaroshenko”) was an attend psychiatrist in MGH.

4. The Defendant Zainab S. Jabur (“Jabur”) was an attend psychiatrist in the MGH.

5. The Defendant Kate E. Nyquist (“Nyquist”) was a resident psychiatrist in the MGH.


6. On September 4, 2008, the plaintiff did a protest in the state appellate courthouse. She protested that the state appeal court deprived her of due process when the court ruled a sua sponte dismissal for failure to state a claim . The plaintiff was accidently fell down from a balcony and was seriously injured. She was sent to Mass. General Hospital (“MGH”) immediately.

7. On September 11, 2008, the plaintiff was involuntarily transferred to the mental section. An attend psychiatrist, Defendant Yaroshenko, was happened to be the doctor who believed that the plaintiff suffered delusional disorder so that she filed a petition for a civil commitment.

8. The plaintiff wrote down two letters for asking a Chinese psychiatrist for evaluation, to which Defendant Yaroshenko ignored.

9. In her affidavit, Defendant Yaroshenko baselessly accused the plaintiff of threatening others:

“Of note, Ms. Li has also verbally threatened others (as described above), but has not assaulted anyone and has no known history of doing so”. (AFFIDAVIT, p2, ¶5)
Defendant Yaroshenki failed to provide any fact in support of such accusation. In fact, the plaintiff never/ever threatened others and had no such history.

10. At the end of September 2008, Defendant Jeff Huffman (“Huffman”), another psychiatrist in MGH, took place of Defendant Yaroshenki and became the plaintiff’s treatment doctor.

11. Although Defendant Huffman diagnosed the plaintiff as “r/o delusional disorder” (r/o = rule/out), he never told the plaintiff of such diagnosis.

12. On the first Roger hearing of October 2, 2008, Defendant Huffman adamantly claimed that the plaintiff suffered “delusional disorder.” Defendant Huffman’s testimony can be subjected to be self-inflicted and misleading. The “delusional disorder” is different from “rule/out delusional disorder,” while “r/o delusional disorder” means that it may be or may not be delusional disorder. Defendant Huffman understood that to commit a patient involuntarily, the evidence must be beyond reasonable doubt, while the “rule/out delusional disorder” could not be beyond reasonable doubt.

13. Based on Huffman’s testimony and Yaroshenki’s affidavit, the judge from Boston Municipal Court ruled an Order of Civil Commitment pursuant to M.G.L. Ch. 123, §7, that committed the plaintiff in hospital not to exceed 45 days.

14. Before receiving the order of the commitment, Defendant Huffman’s attorney, Diane M. Geraghty Hall, told Defendant Huffman that she did not think that the Municipal Court would commit the plaintiff based on her mental condition, so Defendant Huffman asked the plaintiff whether she wanted to go home. However, later that day, Defendant Huffman received the unexpected order of commitment. He realized or should have realized that how easy for a Caucasian to commit a minority.

15. After the first commitment, the plaintiff notified to sue discrimination for not having a Mandarin psychiatrist. The hospital arranged Dr. Albert Yeung, a psychiatrist from Harvard Medical School, came to see the plaintiff.

16. Dr. Yeung speaks Mandarin, the plaintiff’s mother language. He diagnosed that the plaintiff did not suffer any psychosis symptoms . (delusional disorder belongs to psychosis). Dr. Yeung suggested that letting the plaintiff back to her own doctors for treatment.

17. Defendant Huffman, however, arranged his colleague Renee Sorrentino, a Caucasian psychiatrist in MGH, to make evaluation. Dr. Sorrentino took words out of the context. She argued that the plaintiff claimed no suicidal thought, but the plaintiff’s web blog indicated that, back to 2004, the plaintiff had suicidal thought when she was sexually harassed in Raytheon Company. Thus, Dr. Sorrentino concluded that this “inconsistent”, from 2004 to 2008, showed that the plaintiff had high “risk of suicidal”.

18. Of course, Defendant Huffman adopted the second language evaluation by Dr. Sorrentino and ignored the first language evaluation by Dr. Yeung.

19. On the second Roger hearing of 10/23/2008, Defendant Huffman again adamantly claimed that the plaintiff suffered “delusional disorder” with respect to the plaintiff’s sexual harassment lawsuit and the depriving due process issue:

Attorney: Doctor, can you descript what your …diagnosis?
Dr. Huffman: Sure. I believe Ms. Li suffered delusional disorder related to her perception of being discriminated both in past by her employer Raytheon and therefore by US court system, and they have declined her case for proper national and sexual discrimination...
Attorney: and your diagnosis?
Dr. Huffman: Delusional disorder.

20. On October 3, 2008, the Boston Municipal Court ruled second order which forced the plaintiff to take medicine.

21. Since then, Defendant Huffman instructed a resident psychiatrist, Kate E. Nyquist, to ask the plaintiff (almost everyday) for how about her litigation against her ex-employer Raytheon. A giving up the litigation would be viewed as the medicine (Abilify) affection. Defendant Nyquist said “you (the plaintiff) are always talking about your case. If you take medicine, you will start talking about your family.”

22. The plaintiff understood that Defendant Huffman attempted using the medication to change her belief system, to erase her intention to go to court. The plaintiff was horrified. She felt helpless because the treatment team was full of Caucasians.

23. The plaintiff requested for having nurse Sharodin, an Africa-American woman, into the treatment team in order to compromise her traumatic experience.

24. Defendant Huffman, however, specifically asked the nurse section to arrange a Caucasian nurse Christine Joy into this team.

25. At that time, Defendant Zainab S. Jabur (“Jabur”), an attend psychiatrist, took place of Defendant Huffman . Defendant Jabur accused the plaintiff of discriminating against others with respect to the request for having an Africa-America nurse.

26. Under Defendant Jabur’s encourage, Defendant Nyquist harassed the plaintiff on November 4, 2008. She set the plaintiff into a small meeting room (with other two Caucasians, student Kenneth and nurse Nicole), and stated as following:

“we just ask for you be accepting everybody on this floor and try not to discriminate against …”

“I challenge you to think how you make others feel when you make assumptions about them based on their race, …”

“To prevent anything happening here on the floor, hurt any people’s feelings base on their race,…”

“We ask you to continue to respectful all staff here, no matter white, black, Hispanic, …”

“I think ever since I met you, you have been requested for more diversity treatment …”

27. Defendant Nyquist’s conduct triggered plaintiff’s panic attack. Defendant Jabur let the plaintiff take extra-medicine (increase Abilify from 10mg to 15mg) to calm down.

28. As a matter of fact, the plaintiff never took medication (Abilify) into to her stomach during the hospitalizing in MGH, and each time she dropped out the pill from mouth after the nurses left her room. However, all the medical records automatically became positive because the hospital assumed that the plaintiff had taken the pills. In a note on November 6, 2008, Defendant Huffman stated that “the patient’s symptoms of delusional disorder appear to be vastly improved …”

29. The plaintiff was discharged on November 7, 2008. The whole treatment in MGH was a traumatic experience. The plaintiff had to go to Emerson hospital for a real treatment. The Emerson hospital diagnosed that the plaintiff suffered Posttraumatic Stress Disorder “not functioning on a delusional level”.

30. On December 8, 2008, the plaintiff received her discharge summary from MGH, and she realized that the actual diagnosis in MGH, of both admission and discharge, was “rule/out delusional disorder” (not delusional disorder). The discharge summary signed by Defendant Huffman, Defendant Jabur, and Defendant Nyquist.

Count I:
(Civil Conspiracy)

31. The actions of the Defendant Huffman and Defendant Yaroshenko set forth above constitute Civil Conspiracy.

Count II:
(Tortious Interference with Advantageous Relationship)

32. The actions of the Defendant Huffman and Defendant Yaroshenko set forth above constitute Tortious Interference with Advantageous Relationship.

Count III:
(Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress)

33. The actions of the Defendant Huffman, Defendant Jabur, and Defendant Nyquist set forth above constitute Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff Yong Li requests that this Court order the Defendants to pay Li:

a. Emotional distress damages,
b. Punitive damages;
c. Attorneys’ fees (if the plaintiff found at any time); and
d. Costs as provide for by statute; and any other relief to which Li may be entitled.

Respectfully submitted

YONG LI (Pro Se)

Date: November 23, 2009