TOM GILDRED™ Quid Pro Quads – A Migrant Marital Affair Gone Bad
Caribbean & Mexican Immigrant Mothers Form Alliance against civil litigations used as a preemptive tool intentionally to inflict harmful & criminal actions upon individuals suspected of being undocumented US immigrants.

Fairbanks Ranch, Del Mar San Diego CA– What is being called the "Quid Pro Status Quad" or "Do Me A Favor" (Or Else)., in a series of libelous claims filed in Courts across America from San Diego CA to New York City against individuals who are suspected of being undocumented and have presented themselves to be a disconcerted threat to an Employer, Sponsor, American Born Spouse, Resident Neighbor, Landlord, Coworkers or even an x-Lover are now raising eye-brows on a new wave of crimes against Non-US-citizens.  
The "Quid Pro Status Quo" is the means by a US Citizen in threatening to used state, local and federal courts to launch civil litigation with intent to persuade or force response to acts elusive to bribery, various acts of extortion i.e.: In NY, a legal threat to bring a lawsuit alleging ownership over "A Cell Phone Number". Some lawsuits are patterned and designed as "Witness Tampering" tools to persuade immigrant employees and individuals in Landlord/Tenant disputes to drop their cases.

RANCHO SANTA FE, SAN DIEGO (CARIBBEAN TIMES NEWS ONLINE) DECEMBER 17, 2019
(With permissions: Some minimal text lifted from-the San Diego Reader, the New York Post and The New York Daily News).

NO PROTECTION PLAN IN PLACE
An immigrant or undocumented resident is quicker to obtain the benefits from free health care, stand a better chance at acquittal by forming a defense in a federal criminal charge than they will in defending themselves against frivolous libelous lawsuits.
"CODE LEGAL" is now the rhetoric’s used so it is impossible to issue a counter lawsuit because in most case scenarios immigrants cannot afford a defense and some have been noted to have been forced into "Self Deportation". 
To use "CODE LEGAL" all you need is a willing attorney who's willing to join with you in deceiving the public. The civil litigation proceedings are about forms and protocols, therefore making it very easy for an attorney filing a frivolous lawsuit to inoculate themselves and at no time be subject to disbarment or any retroactive repercussions. CASE IN POINT: GILDRED V FOSTER 153554/2017 in one instance of constructive embarrassment tactics used by an American Citizen in order to force pressurized, induce & even influence an act of suicide upon an individual.

In a lawsuit of convenience: Of April 17, 2016 what lay ahead included 3+ years of evidence construction with intent to harass. The evidence then morphed into efforts to induce incriminatory acts on an individual. What evidently were circumstantial innocuous intentions, turned out to be ongoing incognito behavioral patterns, which became fluid and highly pressurized efforts to incriminate, by the use of sometimes in your face innocuous friendly harassment tactics, induce criminal intent and if possible even pushed an unsuspecting x-lover to Gildred's Wife into a state of suicidal mania?

In what had begun as a frivolous benign lawsuit: A San Diego Couple's bizarre lawsuit against an individual in New York City earned itself some unexpected attention from the New York Press. The individual was thought to have been undocumented. But once the lawsuit was filed, it began to confront itself and the purpose of logic begun to out-weigh and defy any form of prudence in whether or not any of its claims make any sense whatsoever.

TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE TO WITHDRAW
Can Thompson's preemptive IIED & Defamation Claims turn out to be in Fact a Hoax? Can truth be he’d indeed rushed, went too far in an alleged Medical Cover-up between himself, of Mexican born wife Carolina Gildred, a family psychiatrist & an overzealous Carlsbad Attorney?
We leave our readers with the Pro's & with the Con's:

The Pro's: 
1. A litigation of fault (Otherwise) determined to indulge an incident of infatuation at best.
2. A litigation of innuendo (In It) to determine a simple rather be left alone family dispute.
3. A Litigation of convenience (Pro Quad) that wasn't intended to be caught on far less anticipated simultaneous news reporting by the New York Press.

The Con's:
1. The process of Matter vs Law is taken to a stretch by testing at length even the Civil litigation and justice system of the Southern District and The New York State Supreme Court. Presently Res: Senior Administrative Judge Her Honorable Kaplan (Chan).
2. An anti-Trial-able offense exclusive to a Trial-able Counter-Defense in a litigation too late, too little was done to cut its nonsensical breach and insults to the judiciary system. 
3. What is "ProSe Civil Litigation" on trial makes it belief that whether an individual was thought to be undocumented or not, that individual's right to an affirmative defense is generally hinge on the individual’s ability to fund a defense. Because it appears that to assert Prudence over form isn't as fundamental as use to be in the civil judicial system. In fact it appears questionable that prudence could still assert itself over any arm of factual ligation through letters and forms? 

If then exist the later? Have Prudence lost its place in America's civilian courts?
Then, anyone, any-person who can deem themselves more financially capable, can insulate a lawsuit against any other for their simple lacking in those formalities that's perceived in a defendant who cannot punctuate expediencies formidable enough in order to launch any form of defense. Therefore the Law of expediency in our justice system which have always been the core structure of formidable prudence, stands to be defeated (removed) from its path to (supersede) questionable  forms (formality) simple because the lesser fortunate defendant (An Immigrant) could not sustain financial access to support a well needed counter-defense in any civil (let alone) frivolous civil litigation.