Dow Docs, 1974 How PS's got around paying the IRS taxes on Failed Devices

Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 16:44:13 -0700

From:

Ilena Rose

Thanks to Ron and Deana for these gems

Report of phonecall received by Silas Braley

November 5, 1974 PRODUCED BY DCC & DCW

DISCUSSION WITH DR. ROBERT CASEY LA VETA, Medical Square,

1000 West LaVeta #103, Orange, California 92668

On October 30, at the plastic surgery meeting in Houston, Tom Mazelin and I had a lunch and discussion with the above doctor concerning the problems he has had with three patients. The following is a summary of the discussion.

He stated that he had been using our devices for a number of years with great success, never having any problems with infection. Within the past 6-8 months, he has, however, had three cases with infections. He states that he cannot attribute it to our packaging problem, but neither can not. One patient was a doctors wife; another patient was a subcutaneous mastectomy with placement of 310 cc devices; the third was strictly a cosmetic one. The first patient, since it was a doctor's wife, there was no charge for the surgery, but of course, there was for the device. On the second patient, there was no problem since the insurance would take care of it. The third patient was the wife of a National Guardsman, and she has some Keyser insurance, but this will not take care of the initial implant, of course, and there is some question as to taking care of the replacement. He is very careful to explain to all his patients that there is no absolute surety in any surgical problems that problems can occur. He, therefore, does not expect to have any complaints from them. He has been very careful not to blame the device and also not to implicate himself in these problems. Any repair work he does because of problems of this sort and other areas of plastic surgery, he always charges the patient a minimum so as to not give the impression that he is making amends for a mistake. The same thing is true of these patients. He wanted to know if we would replace the devices for the patients, in the first place because he's not charging the doctor anyway, and in the third patient because she certainly is not able to do this herself very well. We stated that we would replace the devices the same as we do when he puts his finger thru the device or something of that sort, so there would be no problem with getting replacements on all three of these. Tom Mazelin will take care of this. He then asked if there was any way that we could help defray the cost of the repair work, that is, the removal and replacement. This would be perhaps $150-200, although he charges the patient only $100 for it. Costs in the office, of course, are lower than hospital charges, and therefore would explain the $100 charge for the repair work. I said that we would certainly consider this and we would let him know about it.

M-240335

Dr, Robert CASEY LA VETA

Page 2

PRODUCED BY DCC & DOW

Upon further discussion, it turned out that he would rather not have the cost paid directly to him as this goes on his the income tax. It was suggested that a pair of breasts would be quite acceptable, thus, allaying his charges, and at the same time not involving the patients at all. I said that this would be satisfactory and that we would give him in lieu of payment of the cost of the replacement one pair of breasts. Therefore, we made the agreement that we would supply him the six pair of breasts. Thus we would be supplying him with replacements with those taken out and also supplying him with a pair in each case in lieu of payment of the surgical charges. Tom Mazelin will take care of these. Dr. Casey was throughout the discussion, very sympathetic with our position. He was in no way trying to pressure us into supplying him with anything. The relations with him remain excellent.

CC:

Mel Nelson

John Hoyt

Art Rathjen

Tom Mazelin

M-240336