Petitioner: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF DENTISTRY
Respondent: JACK ANDREW CLINE, D.D.S.
Judges: F. SCOTT BOYD
Agency: Department of Health
Locations: Lauderdale Lakes, Florida
Filed: Aug. 29, 2016
Status: Closed
Settled and/or Dismissed prior to entry of RO/FO on Tuesday, September 20, 2016.
Latest Update: Dec. 25, 2024
STATE OF FLORIDA
BOARD OF DENTISTRY
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, |
PETITIONER, |
v. CASE NO. 2011-04317
JACK A. CLINE, D.D.S.,
RESPONDENT.
——$ $$
ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT
COMES NOW, Petitioner, Department of Health, by and through its
undersigned counsel, and files this Administrative Complaint before the
Board of Dentistry against Respondent, Jack A. Cline, D.DS, and in
support thereof alleges: |
1. Petitioner is the State Department charged with regulating the
practice of dentistry pursuant to Section 20.43, Florida Statutes; Chapter
456, Florida Statutes; and Chapter 466, Florida Statutes.
2. At all times material to this Complaint, Respondent was a
licensed dentist within the State of Florida, having been issued license
number DN 8037.
3. Respondent's address of record is 654 Via Verona, Deerfield
Beach, Florida 33442.
4. Respondent provided dental treatment to Patient HJ. from on or
about November 14, 2008, through on or about September 27, 2010.
5. On or about November 14, 2008, Patient H.J. presented to
Respondent as a new patient for the purposes of establishing a general
dentist-patient relationship. Respondent performed a comprehensive oral
examination and exposed a full mouth set of radiographs. A periodontal
screening and recording was documented. A charting of existing conditions
was completed. Respondent advised Patient H.J. that, “#18 - 20 Bridge is
out, will not recement, tooth broken down.” |
6. Onor about September 14, 2009, Patient H.J. presented back to
Respondent. Respondent's treatment notes documented that a new bridge
needs to be completed for teeth numbers 18 through 20.
7. On or about September 17, 2009, Patient H.J. presented back to
Respondent. Respondent presented a treatment plan to Patient H.J. to
construct a new bridge for teeth numbers 18 through 22. Respondent
advised Patient H.J. a new bridge was necessary due to recurrent decay in
tooth number 20. Tooth number 20 had prior endodontic treatment that was
decayed and had a fractured steel post. Respondent advised Patient H.J. that
if she could not afford to have tooth number 20 extracted, the tooth could be
-2-
® @
left in place to help retain the height of the alveolar ridge. “Respondent
advised this course of action, even though tooth number 20 had recurrent
decay, was broken, and no longer able to adequately support a bridge.
8. At the September 17, 2009 appointment, Patient HJ. signed the
proposed treatment plan, agreeing to Respondent's plan to fabricate a new
bridge for teeth numbers 18 through 22. Respondent's treatment plan should
have included removal of decayed tooth number 20, before seating a new
permanent bridge. |
9. On or about October 20, 2009, Patient H.J. presented back to
Respondent to begin treatment for the new bridge for teeth numbers 18
through 22. Respondent's treatment notes documented, “bridge Prep 18-22.”
10. On or about November 4, 2009, Patient H.J. presented back to
Respondent to have the new bridge seated. Respondent's treatment notes
documented the bridge for teeth numbers 18 through 22 was seated. The
new bridge was permanently cemented, over tooth number 20, which had a
decayed root canal. Respondent failed to properly treat Patient H.J.’s dental
problems by leaving tooth number 20 in place instead of removing it before
the new bridge was cemented. This was not an acceptable treatment plan.
® e
11. Asa result of the dental treatment Respondent provided, Patient
H.J.s new bridge caused her discomfort and sensitivity. Patient Ha. went to a
Subsequent treater, Dr. R.G. Dr. R.G. extracted tooth number 20, to relieve
Patient H.J.'s pain. |
12. The prevailing standard of diagnosis and treatment for rendering
dental treatment requires a dentist to address compromised teeth before
seating a permanent bridge. Respondent should have extracted tooth
number 20, then placed a temporary bridge from teeth numbers 18 through
22, allowing time for the surgical area TO heal, before proceeding to seat the
permanent bridge. :
13. Section 466.028(1)(x), Florida Statutes (2008 - 2010), provides
that “[bJeing guilty of incompetence or negligence by failing to meet the
minimum standards of performance in diagnosis and treatment when
measured against generally prevailing peer performance, including, but not
limited to, the undertaking of diagnosis and treatment for which the dentist is
not qualified by training or experience or being guilty of dental malpractice[,]”
shall constitute grounds for disciplinary action by the Board of Dentistry.
14. Respondent failed to meet the minimum standards of
performance in diagnosis and treatment when measured against generally
prevailing peer performance in one or more of the following ways:
By failing, on or about November 4, 2009, to extract
decayed root canal tooth number 20, before proceeding
with fixed prosthetic treatment. Respondent should have
extracted tooth number 20, created a temporary bridge for
teeth numbers 18 through 22, and allowed the surgical
area to heal before seating the permanent bridge.
15. Based on the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section
466.028(1)(x), Florida Statutes (2008-2010), by being guilty of
incompetence or negligence by falling to meet the minimum standards of
performance in diagnosis and treatment when measured against generally
prevailing peer performance, including, but not limited to, the undertaking
of diagnosis and treatment for which the dentist is not qualified by training
or experience or being guilty of dental malpractice.
DAT
WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board of
Dentistry enter an order imposing one or more of the following penalties:
permanent revocation or suspension of Respondent's license, restriction of
practice, imposition of an administrative fine, issuance of a reprimand,
placement of Respondent on probation, corrective action, refund of fees
billed or collected, remedial education and/or any other relief that the
Board deems appropriate.
LA
4 day of fAay, 2012.
STEVEN L. HARRIS, M.D., M.Sc.
Interim State Surgeon General
Florida Department of Health
JENNIFER A. TSCHETTER
Interim General Counsel
Florida Department of Health
KARIN BYRNE
Attorney Supervisor
Prosecution Services Unit
ri 4 err ttre nentnineremnsn nent
MENT ‘OF HEALT Jeff G. Peters
DEPART TY CLERK Assistant General Counsel
SIGNED this
CLERK aa else DOH Prosecution Services Unit
4052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin C-65
Tallahassee, FL 32399-3265 _
Florida Bar No. 718343
850.245.4640 850.245.4683 FAX
PCP: 05-04-12
PCP Members: J.T.M. & C.M.
NOTICE OF RIGHTS |
Respondent has the right to request a hearing to be
conducted in accordance with Section 120.569 and 120.57,
Florida Statutes, to be represented by counsel or other qualified
representative, to present evidence and argument, to call and
cross-examine witnesses and to have subpoena and subpoena
duces tecum issued on his or her behalf if a hearing is requested.
NOTICE REGARDING ASSESSMENT OF costs
Respondent is placed on notice that Petitioner has incurred
costs related to the investigation and prosecution of this matter.
Pursuant to Section 456.072(4), Florida Statutes, the Board shall
assess costs related to the investigation and prosecution of a
disciplinary matter, which may include attorney hours and costs,
on the Respondent in addition to any other discipline imposed.
DOH v. Jack A. Cline, D.D.S.; Case # 2011-04317
Docket for Case No: 16-004998PL
Issue Date |
Proceedings |
Sep. 20, 2016 |
Order Closing File and Relinquishing Jurisdiction. CASE CLOSED.
|
Sep. 16, 2016 |
Joint Motion to Relinquish Jurisdiction Without Prejudice filed.
|
Sep. 09, 2016 |
Notice of Serving Petitioner's First Set of Interrogatories, First Set of Requests for Production, and First Requests for Admission to Respondent filed.
|
Sep. 07, 2016 |
Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
|
Sep. 07, 2016 |
Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference (hearing set for November 2, 2016; 9:00 a.m.; Lauderdale Lakes and Tallahassee, FL).
|
Sep. 06, 2016 |
Joint Response to Initial Order filed.
|
Aug. 30, 2016 |
Initial Order.
|
Aug. 29, 2016 |
Notice of Appearance as Co-Counsel (filed by Candace Rochester).
|
Aug. 29, 2016 |
Answer to Administrative Complaint filed.
|
Aug. 29, 2016 |
Election of Rights filed.
|
Aug. 29, 2016 |
Administrative Complaint filed.
|
Aug. 29, 2016 |
Agency referral filed.
|