& by, STATE OF FLORIDA “4 So) DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Sn, 2» DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, 1 Res vs. _ 7 CASE NUMBER: DN 1998-22263 FITZ-HERBERT HARRIS, . ., RESPONDENT. / "ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT — COMES Now, the Petitioner, Department of Health, hereinafter referred to as "Petitioner", and files this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Dentistry against Fitz-Herbert Harris, "Respondent", and alleges: | 1. Effective fuly 1, 1997, Petitioner i is the State agency , charged with regulating the practice of dentistry pursuant to Section 20.43, Florida Statutes; Chapter 455, Florida Statutes; and Chapter 466, Florida Statutes. Pursuant to the authority of Section 20.43 (3) (g), Florida Statutes, the Petitioner has contracted with the Agency for Health Care Administration, hereinafter referred to as the “Agency,” to provide consumer complaint, investigative, and prosecutorial services required by the Divis n of Medical ua ‘Assurance, ‘councils o or ‘board, as appropriate, including f emergency « order of suspension or restriction. 2. Respondent i is, “and has been at all ti times material hereto, a Ficensed dentist in the State Wyner of Florida, having been issued license number D DN 0008880. Respondent's last known address is 11498 Quail Roost Drive, Miami, Florida 33157. 3. On or about August > ; Patien that she needed a a root ot canal performed 0 on n tooth #3. Rs dentist, Dr. Bruce Weisbrot advised her wih i Ba I ns — Bk ; insisted to Patient } » to give Patient M. R. a refund. Ww - U 4. Onor about August 31, 1998, Patient MR. - presented to the Respondent to have the root canal procedure performed, The Respondent xrayed tooth #3, » and, after review v of the x- Tay, - agreed 1 that ¢ a Toot canal would be necessary. The Respondent and Patient M. R. agreed to a price of _ s400 for an immediate root canal, and $400 for a crown to be done at a later date. 5. “On or around August 31, 1998, the Respondent allegedly performed a root canal on Patient M.R.. The Respondent advised Patient M.R. through her son, that he had completed the root canal, and directed her to return on n September 4, 1998, (later rescheduled for September 18, 1998) to begin the procedures for a crown. M: R. paid the Respondent the agreed-upon $400. The Respondent prescribed Cephalexin 250 Omg for Patient MR. for } pain relief. 6. After the procedure, because of continuing discomfort and : an n inability to eat on the right side of her mouth, Patient M.R. returned to her regular dentist, Dr. Weisbrot, on September 14, 1998, Following an examination and review of an x-ray taken on that date, Dr. Weisbrot advised Patient MR. that no root canal had been performed on tooth B. 7. On or about September 18, 1998, ‘Patient M.R. spoke to the Respondent to verify whether or not he had performed a root canal on tooth #3 on August 31, 1998. Respondent “that ‘he had performed the root canal. Patient MLR. spoke with or asions s between September 21, 1998 and October 2, 1998. Respondent ec continued to insist that he had performed the root canal, but agreed Pet n or about March 17, 1999, an investigator fom e Agency for Health Care _ Administration interviewed Respondent. At ‘that time, in the ‘presence of the investigator, Respondent completed the last entry of ii chart of Patient M.R reflecting that Patient M.R. did not present for an appointment in or around September 1998. eee Ulta, 4 treatment. WV - . U _ COUNTI 9. The Petitioner readopts paragraphs 1 through 8 as if fully set forth herein. - 10. The actions of the Respondent constitute a violation of Section 466.028(1)(m), F lorida Statutes, in that the Respondent failed to keep written dental records justifying the course of treatment of the patient . . COUNT lL. The Petitioner readops panera 1 through 8 as if fully set forth herein. 12. The actions of the Respondent constitute a violation of Section 466.028(1)(0), Florida Statutes, in in that the Respondent engaged i in fraud, deceit, or misconduct i in the practice of dentistry by accepting payment for goods and services (performing a root canal) which were never delivered. | | COUNT I 13. The Petitioner readopts paragraphs 1 through 8 as if fully set forth herein. 14. The actions of the Respondent constitute a violation of Section 466.028(1)(x), Florida Statutes, in that the Respondent’s actions amount to incompetence or negligence in the : practice of dentistry b failing to meet the minimum standards of performance in diagnosis and Pet aa dl RH WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectly requests the Board of Dentistry enter an order imposing one or more of the folowing penalties: revocation or suspension of the Respondent's # =. Heense, restriction of the Respondent’ practice, {imposition of an administrative fine and costs, . FLCyelt Dos, PCP: Garcia, Robinson, &Fisher ; eee .. issuance of a reprimand, placement of the © Respondent on 1 probation, and/or any other relief. that the Board deems appropriate. SIGNED ray « Mla 1999 _ Robert G. Brooks, M.D. Secretary, Department of Health "DEPARTMENT OF HE DEPUTY. clenK _ CLERK UBER Mot DATE 3- 3-Roevo Chief Attorney _» Agency for Health Care Administration ‘COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER: John L.Chaves, Senior Attorney Agency for Health Care Administration Practitioner Regulation — Allied Health ~ P. O. Box 14229, mail stop 39 Tallahassee, Florida 32317- 4229 (850) 410-3467(Telephone) (850) 488-1855 FAX) DATE:November 18, 1999

Docket for Case No: 00-001607