The issues in this case are whether Respondent engaged in sexual misconduct in the practice of medicine, in violation of section 458.331(1)(j), Florida Statutes; and, if so, what is the appropriate sanction.Petitioner failed to prove sexual activity within a patient-physician relationship, by clear and convincing evidence, where the alleged victim was the only direct witness and her varied accounts of what happened differed in numerous details.
The issue in this matter is whether Respondent timely requested an administrative hearing to contest an Administrative Complaint.Petitioner failed to timely file his petition for hearing. Further, Petitioner failed to prove equitable tolling. Therefore, he lacked standing to initiate an administrative hearing.
The issues presented in this case are whether Respondent has violated the provisions of chapters 456 and 480, Florida Statutes, as alleged in the Administrative Complaint; and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.Petitioner presented clear and convincing evidence that Respondent engaged in sexual misconduct in the practice of massage therapy. Recommend $2,500.00 fine and revocation.
The issues to be decided are whether Respondent violated sections 456.072(1)(a), (n), and (w), and 458.331(1)(g), (k), (q), and (v), Florida Statutes (2015), as alleged in the Administrative Complaint; and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.Respondent sold prescription for medical marijuana to a non-resident prior to qualifying as an ordering physician, without advising patient that medical marijuana was still illegal in Florida. Recommend revocation.
Whether disciplinary action should be taken against Respondent’s license to practice as a medical doctor based on allegations that he violated sections 458.331(1)(t), (m), and (q), Florida Statutes (2008-2010), as alleged in Petitioner’s Amended Administrative Complaint.The Department failed to prove the allegations in its Amended Administrative Complaint by clear and convincing evidence.
The issues in this case are whether Respondent violated section 458.331(1)(t), Florida Statutes (2009),1/ by committing medical malpractice as alleged in the Amended Administrative Complaint; and, if so, what is the appropriate sanction.Medical malpractice was not proven where the standard of care was not clearly shown to require a liver biopsy prior to a colonoscopy under the particular circumstances of the patient involved.
