Crawford v. Community Health Systems Inc., et al

COMING SOON

This site follows the pro se litigants, Wesley and Colleen Crawford, as they navigation a complex case against a hospital and its private equity holder, Community Health Systems, Inc. et al.   Plaintiffs are litigating in opposition of three law firms, eight lawyers, and a court that blocks access to records.   

Plaintiffs are launching this site so the public can see what is happening behind the scenes and can watch how they are able to manage the cases, and how they learn as they go.

Wesley & Colleen Crawford

Living in the Tennessee jungle

Case # 3:25-cv-00516: Last docket file is Doc 54  Plaintiffs’ Notice of Pending Ministerial Failure and Structural Impossibility (See embedded file below)

SITE LAUNCH STATUS:  

We will be finished setting up the structure by Friday, May 15.  After that, we’ll test it to make sure everything works, and then we’ll open the site for beta testers while we film the initial videos.  

Case # 25-5868 Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals

Pending ruling on our in forma pauperis motion filed in the original case.  The district court has not ruled yet.  We have been waiting since September, 2025, which is why we filed the Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

The writ has been assigned to a panel of judges.  We’re waiting for a response.  This is in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.   The Court assigned the writ to the original case, and to 00516.

This is an interesting case, to say the least.  Read the court doc embedded below.   We are on Doc. 54 and the Clerk has not even issued a summons yet and defendants have not been served.  This is why we filed the notice (scroll the page to see what we filed).

Circuit Court applied our writ of mandamus to this case, and to the original case.

Petition for Writ of Mandamus filed

Corporate defendants removed this case to the district court.  We are waiting to see if the district court judge grants our motion to remand back to the Circuit Court.

See 3:25-cv-00516 – District Court 

Cleland v. Bronson Health Care Grp., Inc.

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals: 25-5868

We are challenging the Cleland case being used to dismiss EMTALA failure to screen claims.  The EMTALA text does not require an improper motive.  Issues being presented to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals includes:

Whether the District Court erred in dismissing the EMTALA screening claim by requiring proof of an “improper motive” under Cleland v. Bronson Health Care Grp., Inc., 917 F.2d 266 (6th Cir. 1990).

Whether Cleland’s improper-motive requirement for EMTALA screening claims remains viable after the Supreme Court’s holding in Roberts v. Galen of Virginia, Inc., 525 U.S. 249 (1999), which rejected any motive requirement for EMTALA stabilization and transfer claims.

Whether this case presents grounds for en banc review of Cleland’s improper-motive requirement for EMTALA screening claims, which remains binding in the Sixth Circuit but conflicts with EMTALA’s plain text, CMS regulations, and the overwhelming weight of authority in other circuits rejecting any motive requirement.

Second District Court Case

District Court: 3:25-cv-00516

This case happened when the Community Health Systems, Inc. defendants removed our state case (2-304-25 Knox County) to the district court, which resulted in the same judge being assigned from the original case.   

The hospital filed a motion to stay discovery.   We filed an objection.

The Sixth Circuit applied our original case writ of mandamus to this second case.  Waiting for a ruling.

Original District Court Case

3:24-cv-00382  (District Court in Knoxville, Tennessee)

This case is being stalled by the court refusing to rule on our in forma pauperis application to appeal.    We filed a writ of mandamus and are waiting for a decision to be made.  The writ is to request the Court of Appeals (6th Circuit) to order the lower court to either deny or grant our IFP motion so the case status is ‘closed’.

The Pillars of Our Site

Public Awareness

Public information, docket management, thought provoking questions and general information.  (Our blog posts are open to the public.)

Pro Se Journey

Chronological walkthroughs of actual filings, what we were thinking when we wrote them, what worked and what did not.  (Requires membership)

Community

Members can communicate with us, share their own experiences, ask each other questions, and build the collective knowledge base.  (Requires membership)