Dr. Carlon Colker has filed a blistering response to Janel Grant and denies any improper treatment administered at the Peak Wellness Clinic.
Last month, Grant filed a petition seeking her complete medical records from the Connecticut-based clinic with claims she received treatments including pills and I.V. infusions, which were not disclosed to her.
Grant began seeing Colker around November 2019 and filed the petition in the Superior Court of Connecticut seeking the records, although she is not suing Colker or Peak Wellness.
McMahon filed a motion to block the petition – arguing that it violated the agreed-upon stay order to the civil suit to allow for the ongoing federal investigation to take place. On Tuesday, Judge Jeffrey Meyer denied McMahon’s motion.
Colker’s representatives have filed a fifteen-page verified complaint for the bill of discovery seeking documentation from Grant while denying any improper treatment and citing numerous damages to his name and reputation from the accusations.
They have requested that Grant respond with the documentation within twenty days by August 27 and agree to a deposition next month.
The plaintiffs (Dr. Colker & Peak Wellness, Inc.) are compelling Grant to “provide information concerning her activities in intentionally fostering patent lies and material misstatements concerning her interactions with and treatment by Plaintiffs” and are accusing Grant of defamation, tortious interference with business relations, and negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress on Dr. Colker.
In a response to Colker & Peak Wellness’ bill of discovery being filed, Grant’s attorney Ann Callis of Holland Law provided the following statement to POST Wrestling and Wrestlenomics:
The court sided with Janel and against McMahon in confirming she was within her right to seek her own medical records and data from Dr. Carlon Colker of Peak Wellness. It is perplexing, but on brand to file an attack against a woman formerly in his care.
The complaint labeled Grant’s actions as a “smear campaign” designed to “bolster her well-publicized allegations concerning alleged sex trafficking and sexual assault by World Wrestling Entertainment, Vince McMahon, and John Laurinaitis” and emphasized that neither Colker nor Peak Wellness are named as defendants in the civil suit while noting there is a “Celebrity Doctor” and “Alternative Clinic” cited anonymously in the suit.
Attempts by POST Wrestling and Wrestlenomics to confirm that Colker and Peak Wellness were the anonymized “Celebrity Doctor” and “Alternative Clinic” were made, but we were unable to receive confirmation of that link.
Colker argues that he “always advised and consulted in advance with Grant concerning any specific medications she was prescribed. Grant baselessly accuses Plaintiffs of failing to provide her with a Private Policy and itemization of any bills, despite the undisputable documented evidence to the contrary, including that Grant expressly signed and acknowledged receipt of Plaintiffs’ privacy policy, which are in Grant’s possession along with the entirety of her electronic medical record and metadata.”
Colker and Peak Wellness explicitly deny withholding any information regarding her care, never refused or avoided explaining any of the treatments Grant received, never gave Grant any “pushback” when Grant inquired as to the specifics of what vitamins she was provided, denied claims of Grant stating she felt “unwell” during I.V. sessions, and that Colker ever “berated” Grant is “recklessly and harmfully false.”
Colker’s complaint contends that the “flagrant and uncontrolled dissemination of these lies by Grant has caused and will continue to cause Dr. Colker and Peak Wellness irreparable harm and perhaps incalculable damages, but well over tens of millions of dollars.”
They are seeking the materials necessary from Grant to prove that her claims are libelous and that the plaintiffs have “no other adequate remedy at law to obtain the materials and information requested.”
Colker and Peak Wellness are asking the court to require Grant to produce the documents (which they have outlined in an exhibit), and seeking information related to Grant’s phone records, social media sites she has engaged with, and emails with information regarding Grant sharing information about her treatment at the clinic.
They are also seeking to depose Grant along with additional relief in law or equity that the court finds justified.
