So, this is how it works.  First there is a pre-trial conference (PTC) at which one says whether or not one disputes the case and if one does then a trial date is set.  My PTC was held on Thursday March 10, 2005.   At that hearing, despite my having written to Accelerated Receivables Management, Inc., (ACR) giving chapter and verse of what had happened to me at the hands of the Mayo, ACR’s attorney, Francine Clair Landau, Esq., said she knew nothing of it whatsoever and would refer back to the Mayo and let me know if the matter would be pursued or dropped.   At the PTC the trial date was set for Thursday May 12, 2005.  Ms. Landau told the judge she would not be calling any witnesses (to see the court document stating this, click the link* below).  Eventually, after repeated requests to Ms. Landau for an answer I received a letter two days before the court date saying that Mayo were going ahead.
 
The letter (to see it click the link* below) did acknowledge the short notice and gave me the opportunity of deferring the hearing.  However, I live in the country and had already made arrangements that would have been very inconvenient, if not impossible to alter, so I had to proceed.  I did wonder if the delay could be a subterfuge to put me off balance but since I always like to think the best of people, upon reflection decided that Ms. Landau, as an officer of the court and member of the Florida Bar, would not stoop to such an underhanded ploy.
 
I went to the court Thursday May 12, 2005 and was very surprised to see that Ms. Landau had called two witnesses from the Mayo and was “prepping” them in the hall outside the judge’s chambers.  The hearing was held in the judge’s chambers and was quite friendly and informal.   Ms. Landau started off by asking the Mayo people who they were, if they worked for the Mayo and, as I recall, if they knew about the billing.  I pointed out to Ms. Landau that she had said she would not be calling anyone and I showed her the court document to this effect (to see the court document stating this, click the link* below).  Subsequently someone told me that the Mayo/ACR may have been trying to run up the costs and that I should refer the matter to the Bar Association.  However, as I said, I always like to think the best of people so again I couldn’t believe that an attorney and officer of the court would do such a petty thing deliberately so I decided that it was just an honest mistake and let it go.  But I did think Ms. Landau’s questioning of the Mayo people utterly pointless, especially since I had written reams to ACR

about the Mayo’s mistreatment of me and their billing.  Also the people from the Mayo were looking increasingly uncomfortable, so to save time and to put them at their ease I said I would accept that I had been in the Mayo and had been billed.  DUH!
 
I explained that the Mayo had punctured my stomach in two places by mistake and that I didn’t think I should have to pay for any of the consequences resulting from that mistake.   I tried to introduce documents from the CDC.  Also from the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel stating that bedsores are entirely preventable together with other documents but Ms. Landau objected to everything.  Then she objected to a statement my wife had prepared. Without going into all the ins and outs it became apparent that Ms. Landau was going to object to everything I said.   I showed the judge the letter where they said they would cancel the bill, the amount I paid the Mayo and the items on the bill that weren’t related to the heart surgery.   Would you believe that some were disallowed because I’m not a doctor and was therefore was unable to prove that the items were unrelated to heart surgery?  Apparently, in the US legal system, commonsense doesn’t count for much and the three operations on my abdomen and my infections and illnesses were a result of fairy dust. 
 
Anyway, the judge explained to me that we live in litigious times, he agreed with me that the Mayo had not been gentlemanly and said that he was going to take the matter under advisement so I told everyone, especially the couple from the Mayo (who were looking even more embarrassed and uncomfortable by the minute) that I held no personal animus towards them and left, leaving them all having a little conference.  In the event the judge reduced the bill to $1525, plus $175 court costs.