DENTAL MALPRACTICE, FRAUD AND EMBEZZLEMENT JUNE 6, 2011

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA

PINAL COUNTY

SUESIE KENT HEMPFLING, ) Case No: ________________________

LEE KENT HEMPFLING )

Petitioners / Plaintiffs )

)

v )

) DATED: June 6, 2011

)

CVDC HOLDINGS LLC, )

CVD CARE LLC, )

WPF HOLDINGS LLC, ) DENTAL MALPRACTICE,

WYNN CAFFALL D.D.S., P.C., ) FRAUD

CANYON VISTA DENTAL CARE LLC,) AND EMBEZZLEMENT

DR. WYNNE C. CAFFALL, )

DR. JOHN A. BIGLER )

DR. JAMES A. BOURNE, )

DR. TREVOR CAFFALL )

Defendants / Respondents

PARTIES

All known parties are located in Arizona. Plaintiffs Suesie Kent Hempfling and Lee Kent Hempfling, husband and wife, reside in Pinal County. Defendants Wynn Caffall, John A. Bigler, James A. Bourne and Trevor Caffall reside in Pinal County or Maricopa County. The companies CVDC Holdings LLC, CVD Care LLC, WPF Holdings LLC, WYNN CAFFALL D.D.S., P.C. and Canyon Vista Dental Care LLC are all at the same physical address.

JURISDICTION

The Superior Court has jurisdiction in matters relating to malpractice, as well as to Chapter 18 of Title 13 of the Arizona Revised Statutes section 13-1802 and TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 95 > § 1956 (a)(1)(A)(i)(B)(i). Jurisdiction is not vested by law in another court. This case involves the title to or possession of real property. The Superior Court has jurisdiction in cases amounting to felony, and cases of misdemeanor not otherwise provided for by law.

VENU

Both Plaintiffs are residents of Pinal County. The business defendants are all located at the same office suite address within Pinal County. The incidents, events and acts presented here all took place within Pinal County.

COUNT 1

EMBEZZLEMENT

1. Plaintiffs first became aware of theft by embezzlement, upon receipt of records submitted to Plaintiff from Defendants, following 15 day notice of demand for documents. Such false financial record was provided in U.S. Mail in violation of Mail Fraud law; mailed August 21, 2009.

2. A check was issued to and cashed by Canyon Vista Dental Care (or by another associated company as shown in the list of Defendants) on May 1, 2009 in the amount of $1668.60, that represented a total of $1854.00 minus a cash discount. On May 18, 2009 that amount was to be refunded to be used for an alternate procedure. On May 18, 2009 the single patient ledger lists those funds as the property of the Defendants. Its only entry is as a ‘charity adj’. No refund has ever been made. A total of $72.00 was paid to Defendants on June 22, 2009 which was to cover the total cost of $1740.60 for the alternate procedure.

3. CVDC HOLDINGS, LLC, and/or CVD CARE LLC, and/or WPF HOLDINGS, LLC, and/or WYNN CAFFALL, D.D.S., P.C., and/or CANYON VISTA DENTAL CARE LLC, do knowingly control the property of Plaintiffs with the intent to deprive Plaintiffs of such property; did knowingly convert for an unauthorized term the property of Plaintiffs entrusted to the defendant and placed in the defendant’s possession for a limited, authorized term or use; did knowingly obtain the property of Plaintiffs by means of financial material misrepresentation with intent to deprive the Plaintiffs of such property; did control the property of Plaintiffs knowing or having reason to know that the property was stolen; did knowingly take control, title, use and management of a vulnerable adult’s property while acting in a position of trust and confidence and with the intent to deprive the vulnerable adult of the property. The property (cash payment for dental services) was given to defendants as payment for bona fide goods and services provided by the defendant and the payment was at a rate that was customary for similar goods or services in the community that the vulnerable adult resided in at the time of the transaction.

4. The Defendants claimed ‘charity adj’ for the entire amount paid to them, instead of refund, with separate counts of embezzlement for each entry.

5. ‘Charity’ is the practice of benevolent giving. In order for the defendants to claim benevolent giving the $1562.00 would have had to have been contributed by the defendants, but it was not. It was entered as a ‘Charity Adj.’ in an act of transferring illegally obtained money through legitimate people or accounts so that its original source cannot be traced. ¹

6. Defendants (CVD CARE LLC) paid Plaintiffs $612.00 on September 23, 2009 (the same cost as the dental appliance which had already been claimed as ‘charity adj’), leaving the statement $612 in negative balance. After embezzling the $612 once, they forced the Plaintiffs to be in a state of debt to them, by embezzling the same amount twice.

7. That makes the total theft by embezzlement $2352.60: a class 5 felony, in violation of Chapter 18 of Title 13 of the Arizona Revised Statutes, section 13-1802: Theft.

8. Defendants knowingly benefited from such embezzlement through the lack of income reporting.

Paragraphs 1 through 8 are referenced, incorporated and realleged.

COUNT II

FRAUD

9. Plaintiffs first became aware of financial fraud upon receipt of records submitted to Plaintiff from Defendants, following 15 day notice of demand for documents. Such fraudulent financial record was provided in U.S. Mail in violation of Mail Fraud law; mailed August 21, 2009.

10. The conversion, for an unauthorized term or use, of services or property of another entrusted to the respondents or placed in the respondent’s possession for a limited, authorized term or use constitutes theft and the commission of a crime or crimes and constitutes a prior, separate criminal activity.

11. The Defendants knowingly presented the property involved in a financial transaction, representing the proceeds of a form of unlawful activity and conduct, with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity, knowing that the transaction is designed in whole or in part to conceal or disguise the nature, the location, the source, the ownership, and the control of the proceeds of specified unlawful activity (claiming funds in their trust to belong to them): in violation of TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 95 > § 1956 (a)(1)(A)(i)(B)(i) Laundering of monetary instruments. ²

12. The Single Patient Ledger shows both distinct transactions and deliberate concealment. Defendants knew the money was from some form of unlawful activity and that the unlawful activity at issue was in fact a felony under state, federal or foreign law.

13. With the intent to defraud the Plaintiffs and impugn and cast doubt her testimony before the Dental Board, the dentists sent the fraudulent conveyance to the Plaintiff, claiming uses, and justified such transaction as true, as had or made in good faith, with the intent to deceive, hinder or delay her just debts, damages or demands in violation of 44-1211. Fraudulent conveyance or other transaction with intent to defraud others or defeat creditors.

14. June 29, June 30, July 1, July 8, August 3, August 14 are all listed as no charge in a statement charging to charity contribution. June 10 was a day charged $72 for cancelling an appointment the same day: that never existed.

15. Only July 24 was charged: for the unnecessary permanent solution to a temporary defective flipper.

16. If Plaintiffs had not relied on the assumption that a refund was a refund, the additional $72 would never have been paid. Not knowing until after the fact affected the course of action. And both Plaintiffs have suffered harm because of the misrepresentation. Suesie Kent Hempfling suffered in severe pain, unable to properly eat without teeth, unable to smile, unable to go into the public for embarrassment, unable to kiss her husband or grand children without pain.

17. The financial record is a complete fabrication and the company(ies) and their varied managing members knew it. It was used as a matter of course.

Paragraphs 1 through 17 are referenced, incorporated and realleged.

COUNT III

DENTAL MALPRACTICE

18. The Dental procedure took place June 8, 2009. Plaintiff first became aware of injury sustained by said procedure and surrounding procedures within one week of the procedure, with lack of healing and throbbing pain and repeatedly advised, questioned and sought help and treatment from the Defendants immediately thereafter and continually from June 15, 2009 to August 14, 2009. Plaintiff became aware of the improperly installed ‘flipper’ immediately as it gave considerable painful and sick discomfort; fit incorrectly or not at all.

19. Defendant Dr. James Bourne did cause 3 carpules of Septocaine (68mg per carpule) at 4% with 1:100,000 epi, to be injected quickly, without regard for patient safety, in a hostile and aggressive manner, without regard for depth of injection, or concentrated amount of injection causing bi-lateral Trigeminal Neuralgia, a debilitating and often permanent nerve injury. Septocaine at 4% is a known cause of nerve damage.

20. Defendant Dr. James Bourne did extract seven teeth, leaving bone spurs. The flipper was installed then removed in screams and tears the next morning after a night of throwing up.

21. Defendant Dr. James Bourne did install the upper ‘flipper’ on June 8, 2009. June 9 by telephone it was suggested by Dr. James Bourne to wait for the scheduled appointment, to give the gums time to heal as he was asked about the flipper. On June 15, 2009 Plaintiff re-advised she had to remove the ‘flipper’ because it hurt. It was installed too tightly without regard for patient comfort and care.

22. Dr. James Bourne failed to treat the presented symptoms, failed to take the complaints of pain and discomfort seriously, and all Defendants failed to advise the Arizona Board of Dental Examiners of a potential injury within their practice. Dr. James Bourne was abruptly no longer in the employ of Defendant company(ies) as of June 22, 2009, within hours of Suesie Kent Hempfling’s visit with him.

23. Dr. Trevor Caffall began seeing Plaintiff Suesie Kent Hempfling on June 29, 2009. On June 29, 2009 Dr. Trevor Caffall used a far less dangerous 2% of Lidocaine 1:100,000 epi, but dismissed the complaints of pain to the partial.

24. In dental record keeping: the Clinical Notes page 4, dated 6/10/2009: ‘decided to wait the full week’ is not factual. No such appointment was scheduled, so it could not have been cancelled.

Paragraphs 1 through 24 are referenced, incorporated and realleged.

COUNT IV

FAILURE TO TREAT COMPLAINTS OF PAIN

25. Between June 15, 2009 in person, prior to that over the phone, and August 14, 2009 complaints of pain, discomfort, swelling and failure to heal were relayed in each visit. Plaintiff Suesie Kent Hempfling attended June 22, June 29, June 30, July 1, July 8, July 24, July 27, August 3, and August 14 appointments set up by Dr. Trevor Caffall (some with personal phone calls to Plaintiffs’ home), complaining each time of pain and discomfort from the procedure and seeking help and treatment. No treatment or help for pain associated with the procedure was ever provided.

26. On August 14, 2009 (see Count VIII below) Dr. Trevor Caffall suggested Plaintiff see an oral surgeon where the price to receive evaluation was dependent upon the diagnoses. It was less expensive if the diagnoses did not support dental malpractice.

Paragraphs 1 through 26 are referenced, incorporated and realleged.

COUNT V

UNNECESSARY PROCEDURE

27. On June 24, 2009 Dr. Trevor Caffall performed a permanent, unnecessary procedure (Frenectomy, the dental office did not have a record of or price for) in order to allow the temporary ‘flipper’ to seat better with short upper gums.

28. Dr. James Bourne was well aware of short upper gums before he began thrusting, pushing, and attacking in the application of needle injections of 4% Septocaine.

Paragraphs 1 through 28 are referenced, incorporated and realleged.

COUNT VI

MISDIAGNOSES

29. Dr. Trevor Caffall at the direction and consultation of Dr. Elwynn Caffall and Dr. John Bigler misdiagnosed (or purposely misdirected) Plaintiff’s injury, pain and suffering to possible sinus naval cavity infection. There never was evidence to point to this diagnosis.

Paragraphs 1 through 29 are referenced, incorporated and realleged.

COUNT VII

DISPENSING MEDICATION WITHOUT REGARD

TO PATIENT MEDICAL HISTORY

30. Dr. Trevor Caffall, at the direction and consultation of Dr. Elwynne Caffall and Dr. John Bigler prescribed over the counter Sinus Rinse and August 11, 2009 prescribed 150MG CAP Clindamycin to treat a possible sinus infection. Plaintiff Suesie Kent Hempfling’s medical record was well known by the dental company and attending dentists and staff as having survived colorectal cancer. Prescribing Clindamycin (with its well known colon damage potential) knowing this history is reckless and irresponsible and dangerous.

Paragraphs 1 through 30 are referenced, incorporated and realleged.

COUNT VIII

DOCTORING THE DENTAL RECORD

31. On August 19, 2009, the day the dental record was mailed to Plaintiff, Dr. Trevor Caffall doctored the clinical notes and dental record by adding an entry at 11:15:11 AM in which he claimed to have firsthand knowledge of a procedure he did not attend, and was at the time, not licensed to perform.

32. He claimed the partial was never inserted due to swelling. The record shows otherwise, including June 15, 2009 adjustment and reference to having to take it ‘out’.

33. He did confirm that the patient (Plaintiff Suesie Kent Hempfling) was ‘still complaining of pain in extraction sites in upper anterior’ on July 24, and that the pain was not the result of the frenectomy.

34. He claimed to have prescribed Clindamysin on August 12, 2009, after patient ‘is still in pain’. “Pain crosses midline and seems to be worse when bending over.” The filled prescription of Clindamycin is dated August 11, 2009.

Paragraphs 1 through 34 are referenced, incorporated and realleged.

REQUEST FOR RELIEF

Being placed under debt without knowledge or permission is tantamount to identity theft. Suesie Kent Hempfling, choosing to finally have a cosmetic procedure to get rid of the space between her teeth and then wind up with no teeth at all is simply an overwhelming disaster and has resulted in a completely different life, filled with sorrow and pain. The standard treatments for BI-LATERAL Trigeminal Neuralgia (also known as the ‘suicide’ condition) do not offer much promise. She remains under the care of a Neurologist. The Plaintiffs respectfully request the amount of $5,000,000.00 for each defendant for compensatory damages and punitive damages in an amount to be determined by the trier of fact, and such other relief as the Court may deem appropriate.

Compulsory arbitration is not acceptable.

Copy mailed / distributed on June 6, 2011 to::

CVDC HOLDINGS, LLC

Agent: ELWYNN C CAFFALL

110 S IDAHO RD #260

APACHE JUNCTION, AZ 85219

CANYON VISTA DENTAL CARE, LLC

Agent: ELWYNN C CAFFALL

110 S IDAHO RD #260

APACHE JUNCTION, AZ 85219

ELWYNN C CAFFALL , DDS

Agent: ELWYNN C CAFFALL