PHOENIX — A U.S. bankruptcy court judge has ruled in favor of the former CEO of a Phoenix children’s therapy clinic who used an unproven cancer diagnosis in her defense.
Faced with alleged breach of contract, Bridget O’Brien claimed in court records she was diagnosed with “metastatic breast cancer stage three” with the “prognosis of likely death” and therefore acted in the best interest of her children’s financial future.
But during the course of legal proceedings in the case, attorneys for the plaintiffs raised doubts about O’Brien’s cancer diagnosis. The influential business owner and property investor has a history of fraud claims against her, as documented by 12News and the State of Arizona. O’Brien did not alleviate any doubts about her cancer claim when she failed last year to provide to the court a single record from the Mayo Clinic where she claimed she received years of chemotherapy and treatment.
“Our argument was Bridget had an opportunity to supply all sorts of medical records that prove her unfortunate course of medical treatment, and she provided nothing,” said attorney for the plaintiff, Gerald Shelley. “She should have to prove she was sick.”
A history of theft and fraud claims against O’Brien
As 12News has previously reported, O’Brien has a controversial history involving many alleged victims.
In 2021 O’Brien was caught on surveillance video stealing a dog that was wearing an identification tag in front of its owner’s Biltmore home. O’Brien pleaded guilty to misdemeanor theft and was ordered to pay a fine and take mandatory counseling.
In April of 2020, O’Brien obtained $1-2 million in COVID bailout funds during the same month she purchased a $2 million home. Company records showed the funds were not justified because O’Brien relied almost exclusively on independent contractors, and O’Brien would not publicly discuss the payments.
In 2019 the State of Arizona ceased Medicaid funding to O’Brien’s clinic, Head 2 Toe, once the largest of its kind in Arizona. The decision came after 12News documented allegations of fraud, false billing, and nonpayment to contracted therapists. A common allegation among more than two dozen contractors was that they could not trust what O’Brien told them.
Between 2017 and 2020, O’Brien failed to pay dozens of therapists for their work with special needs clients, citing a host of reasons. O’Brien wrote emails to staff in 2018, saying she had been diagnosed with cancer and it had “progressed more rapidly than originally expected." Therapists who worked closely with O’Brien at the time said they doubted her story. Two former nannies who worked for O’Brien told 12News they also did not believe she had cancer because they saw no signs of her being ill. One former nanny said O’Brien’s mother was treated for cancer shortly before O’Brien began telling people she also had cancer.
Other allegations financial wrongdoing followed O’Brien dating back to 2010.
Bankruptcy court: O’Brien diagnosed with breast cancer and “likely death”
The alleged cancer diagnosis was part of a legal defense mounted by O’Brien in a 2021 lawsuit that alleged O’Brien broke a contract involving the sale of a property.
Valley real estate company NAI Horizon sought $150,000 from O’Brien for an alleged breach of contract. The company accused O’Brien of “scheming and shell games” to avoid her financial obligations.
O’Brien testified in court the decisions she made in regards to the property were intended to protect her two children’s financial future because she knew she would likely die.
“Unexpectedly, I survived,” O’Brien wrote in a statement.
Naturopath Wooten’s signature falsely claimed she was an “MD”
When an attorney for the plaintiffs issued a subpoena for O’Brien to provide proof of cancer treatment in November of 2022, O’Brien submitted a letter from a Phoenix-based naturopathic doctor, Tracy Wooten. The letter stated O’Brien sought from her alternative treatments for cancer.
The letter prompted skepticism among the plaintiffs because naturopaths are not trained to diagnose medical conditions.
There was another problem, according to the plaintiffs. Wooten’s signature on the letter contained the title of “MD.” That was false. Wooten is not an MD.
Naturopath believed letter was needed for a different purpose
After the plaintiffs flagged the discrepancy, O’Brien’s attorney submitted a new version of the same letter to the court that did not contain the “MD” title. O’Brien testified the reason the first letter contained the phrase “MD” was because a typo occurred.
12News spoke with Wooten in December of 2022 by phone and notified her about the letter that was presented as a public record in court. Wooten declined to confirm on-the-record that she wrote the letter, but said she wanted to see a copy of it first. Wooten also told 12News that based on information O’Brien provided to her, Wooten was under the impression the letter was needed for an entirely different purpose. Wooten did not discuss on-the-record that alleged purpose.
12News later provided Wooten a copy of the letter that was submitted in court and asked her to confirm she wrote it, as well as to confirm she made a typo in the original letter. Wooten has declined several requests for comment.
O’Brien said Mayo Clinic could not provide medical record in timely manner
When asked in court why she did not provide a letter directly from the Mayo Clinic where O’Brien previously said she received chemotherapy treatment, O’Brien testified that the hospital was backed up and would not be able to provide records for weeks.
Attorneys for the plaintiff called the naturopath’s letter “hearsay” and wrote, “evidence has come to light that Ms. O’Brien either exaggerated her illness, or never was terminally ill in the first place.”
Judge rules in favor of O’Brien
U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Brenda Martin issued a decision in February 2023 in favor of O’Brien.
“On balance, the Court heard credible testimony from Ms. O’Brien about her cancer diagnosis and treatment that provided an explanation as to why she intended the transfer of the warranty deed for the Dysart property to be conditional," Martin wrote in the 13 page decision. "NAI produced no evidence to suggest that Ms. O’Brien lied about having cancer and the Court finds it credible that Ms. O’Brien had health issues and wanted her children supported in her death.”
"The Court concludes that any failure to provide documentation regarding Ms. O’Brien’s diagnosis and treatment for cancer was justified and was not deliberate,” Martin wrote.
NAI appeals decision
NAI has appealed the decision. Shelley said he worries the decision sends a message that someone can fabricate an illness as an excuse to breach a contract. He’s asking a higher court to remand the case back to Judge Martin for the purpose of pursuing the original subpoena for first-hand medical records.
“The problem is you can’t prove a negative,” Shelley said. “The burden of proof should be flipped and she should have to prove she was sick.”
Martin also ordered the two sides to attempt to reach an agreement outside of court. They will participate in mediation on Thursday.
Horne: Request for Mayo Clinic records an “invasion of privacy”
During the December 2022 trial, O’Brien’s attorney Tom Horne called the request by the plaintiffs for Mayo Clinic medical records “overbroad” and an invasion of privacy.
A contract law professor at ASU tells 12News it would be reasonable for a court to expect documentation from a hospital or cancer treatment clinic as proof of cancer treatment.
“Each case is going to have its own specific set of facts and circumstances,” said attorney Ben Himmelstein. “But generally speaking, if it (cancer treatment) is an issue, and the court believes it to be an important one, one would suspect the judge is going to require some quantum of proof, something that would allow the judge to assess the credibility of whether that is correct or not.”
Himmelstein said if privacy was a concern, attorneys could have reviewed medical records under seal, without them being made public.