This page contains public information and court filings related to a lawsuit I filed in King County Superior Court involving Louis F. Kramp DMD, Theron D. Eichenberger DDS MSD, P.S., the corporate entity associated with Redmond Endodontics.

The lawsuit concerns patient-record access, health care information, dental records, communications, and related issues under Washington law, including RCW 70.02.

The court filings posted or discussed on this page contain allegations made by me as the plaintiff. Those allegations have not been finally adjudicated by the Court. The defendant may deny, dispute, oppose, explain, or respond to those allegations through the legal process.

Nothing on this page should be understood as a court finding, disciplinary finding, professional finding, medical conclusion, dental conclusion, or final determination of liability unless specifically identified as such.

This page is posted for public awareness, patient-rights education, transparency, and discussion of health care records access under Washington law.

In my opinion, this lawsuit became necessary because I made written requests for my own dental and health care records and did not receive what I believe was a complete, lawful, and fully accountable production of the records and communications I requested.

The lawsuit seeks court involvement regarding access to patient records, dental records, health care information, communications, and related materials that I believe are important to understanding my care, my complaints, and the records maintained or withheld by the provider.

This lawsuit is not posted here to suggest that the Court has already decided the issues. It has not.

It is posted because patient-record access is a public-interest issue. Patients should be able to request, obtain, review, verify, and understand their own health care information without being forced into unnecessary litigation.

The claims and allegations in the complaint are based on my personal experience, written requests, correspondence, records produced, records not produced, litigation filings, regulatory complaints, and the reasonable inferences I believe arise from those materials.

The defendant may dispute some or all of my allegations, concerns, interpretations, or conclusions.

The existence of a lawsuit does not mean that liability has been established.

The filing of a complaint means only that allegations have been made and that the plaintiff is asking the Court for relief.

This page is intended to provide public access to litigation materials involving patient-record access and dental accountability.

It is intended to help patients understand that written record requests, timelines, correspondence, certified mail, documentation, and legal filings may become important when a provider does not produce or account for records a patient believes they are entitled to receive.

It is also intended to document my own experience and preserve a public record of the litigation process.

This page is not a court order.

This page is not a finding of malpractice.

This page is not a finding of negligence.

This page is not a finding of professional misconduct.

This page is not a finding that any person or entity violated the law.

This page is not legal advice, medical advice, dental advice, or a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney, physician, dentist, or other qualified professional.

Patient records are not merely administrative paperwork.

They are how patients understand what happened, evaluate treatment, seek second opinions, file complaints, correct inaccurate information, protect legal rights, and make informed decisions about future care.

When records, communications, referrals, chart notes, x-rays, billing records, audit information, metadata, or other health care information are missing, incomplete, delayed, disputed, or not accounted for, the patient may be placed at a serious disadvantage.

A patient should not have to file a lawsuit simply to obtain or verify their own health care information.

This case is pending.

The allegations have not been finally decided by the Court.

Future filings, rulings, orders, responses, appearances, motions, or judgments may affect the status of this case.

This page may be updated as the case develops.

WADAP welcomes good-faith corrections, clarifications, responses, or documentation from any person, provider, practice, corporation, attorney, agency, or entity discussed on this website.

If any statement on this page is inaccurate, incomplete, outdated, or missing important context, I will review the information in good faith and update the page where appropriate.

The defendant, its representatives, or any involved person or entity may submit a correction request, clarification, documentation, or response for review.

This page reflects my personal experience, opinions, concerns, litigation filings, records, correspondence, regulatory filings, public materials, and the reasonable inferences I believe arise from those materials.

Nothing on this page should be understood as a final legal determination unless specifically identified as such.