Foerster v. Cronin — Selected Responses by Dr. Paul Cronin Concerning “Nick,” Medical Billing, and Russia-Gate-Related Statements
Selected excerpts from responses in answers to the complaint filed by Dr. Paul Cronin in Foerster v. Cronin et al., Case No. 2:18-cv-07672-ODW-JC.
The underlying complaint alleged that Dr. Bradley Foerster, Dr. Myria Petrou, and Duaa Altaee became recipients and reporters of sensitive allegations and related material, and later became subjects of criminal allegations, professional investigations, and related discrediting narratives after portions of that material were reported to institutional and federal authorities.
The excerpts below reflect responses to allegations that Dr. Cronin provided Dr. Foerster and Ms. Altaee with sensitive Russia-Gate-related information concerning individuals connected to the University of Michigan, law enforcement, and political figures, then later disclosed that the information had been shared, allegedly rendering Dr. Foerster, Dr. Petrou, and Ms. Altaee targets because of their knowledge of that information.
The allegations addressed in the excerpts below appear in ¶¶6–8 of the complaint. The responses are presented as set out in the filings.
"Nick"
“Agree this statement is true.”
— Dr. Paul Cronin, Answer to Complaint (¶85)
“Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief…”
— Dr. Paul Cronin, Answer to Complaint (¶66)
Certain identifying information has been redacted pursuant to a court-ordered confidentiality agreement.
University of Michigan Medical Billing
“Denied that defendant… described a fraudulent billing scheme…”
— Dr. Paul Cronin, Answer to Complaint (¶28)
Russia-Gate
“Denied for the reason that the allegation is false.”
— Dr. Paul Cronin, Answer to Complaint (¶¶6–8)
“This statement is factually incorrect.”
— Dr. Paul Cronin, Answer to Complaint (¶44)
“This statement is factually incorrect.”
— Dr. Paul Cronin, Answer to Complaint (¶58)
“This statement is factually incorrect.”
— Dr. Paul Cronin, Answer to Complaint (¶76)
Additional Causes of Action
The complaint includes multiple causes of action. The first and second causes of action—defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress—are addressed in the Answer.
The complaint also sets out additional causes of action, including:
- Third Cause of Action — Fraudulent Misrepresentation
- Fourth Cause of Action — Unjust Enrichment
Several early responses to the Third Cause of Action include statements that the allegations are not understood and are denied as false.
Complaint excerpt (Dr. Foerster's filing) — Third and Fourth Causes of Action
Dr. Cronin's response as presented includes the notation “PAGE 27 IS MISSING.”
The claims against Dr. Cronin were dismissed on October 3, 2018.
Dr. Foerster dismissed the federal complaint against Dr. Cronin as an act of good faith before receiving Dr. Cronin’s response.
Dr. Cronin agreed to come forward as a witness.
No witness statement attributed to Dr. Cronin appears in the record.
The timing of the investigation remains at issue. See FOIA appeal:
FBI FOIA Request for Russia-Gate Investigation Dates: Denial and Appeal
Statements are alleged.
Responses vary.
The record remains.
Related Reporting
- The Institutional Fingerprint of the FBI Russia-Gate File
- May 12, 2026 Joint Status Report Filed After FBI Missed May 4 Production Deadline in “Russia-Gate” FOIA Litigation; New Production Dates Set for May 15 and June 16, 2026
- University of Michigan States No Responsive Documents Exist Regarding Dr. Foerster’s 2018 Psychiatric Peer Review Following Litigated FOIA Appeal
- Bank of Ann Arbor Reported $1,412,380 Sheriff's Sale Purchase; Follow-Up RESPA Request Seeks Reconciliation Record