Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
Find Similar Cases by Filters
You can browse Case Laws by Courts, or by your need.
Find 49 similar cases
BOARD OF MEDICINE vs SAYYED ARSHAD HUSSAIN, 90-004699 (1990)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tampa, Florida Jul. 30, 1990 Number: 90-004699 Latest Update: Mar. 11, 1991

Findings Of Fact At all times relevant hereto Respondent was licensed as a medical doctor in Florida and was under contract with the Hillsborough Community Mental Health Center, Inc. to provide psychiatric services to the mental health center 20 hours per week. (Exhibits 1 and 14.) On October 2, 1986, Michael Burton, a Hillsborough County Deputy Sheriff received a call regarding an emergency in an isolated area on the I-75 north of Tampa. Upon his arrival he found M.H., a 21-year old white male handcuffed in the back seat of a game warden's car. A pick-up truck belonging to M.H. had a flexible hose connected to the exhaust to lead into the cab, several suicide notes and a girl's photograph were in the cab of the pick-up. Burton was told by the game warden that while conducting a routine check of the area, he had come upon M.H. attaching the flexible hose to the exhaust of the pick-up, and he arrested M.H. and called for law enforcement personnel. M.H. was transferred to Burton's car and, realizing M.H. was suicidal and consequently a danger to himself, Burton concluded M.H. should be committed and he called for a wrecker to tow away M.H.'s vehicle. M.H. did not agree to voluntary commitment and he was held for involuntary commitment. Due to the isolated location the wrecker took more than an hour to arrive on the scene. During this period Burton talked to M.H. who told Burton he was from South Dakota, he had come to Florida looking to work without success, that he hadn't bathed or eaten for a week, that he had been placed on parole in South Dakota for burglary and that in leaving the state he had violated his parole, and that life was no longer worth living. He also told Burton that although he had been stopped this time (from suicide) he wouldn't be stopped the next time. While awaiting the arrival of the wrecker Burton prepared some of HRS- MH Form 3052A (BA-52) (Exhibit 2) which is the report of law enforcement officer to justify the involuntary presentment of a client for examination to insure the client is not a danger to himself or to others. This is the procedure generally followed for patients presented by law enforcement officers pursuant to the Baker Act. Burton completed this form when he delivered M.H. to the CSU. Upon arrival of the wrecker Burton departed with M.H. who had no opportunity to speak to the driver of the wrecker. Enroute to the crisis center Burton stopped at a McDonald's restaurant where he bought a hamburger, fries and a coke for M.H. Upon arrival at the crisis center Burton delivered M.H. to the receptionist, had copies made of the suicide notes which he left with the BA-52 containing Burton's opinions regarding M.H. being a danger to himself and the observations supporting that opinion. Those observations recited: [M.H.] was found hooking a hose up to the exhaust system of his vehicle and had written suicide notes to his girl friend and mother. [M.] advised he came to Tampa from N. Dakota seeking work and has not been able to find anything. He stated he has not eaten or bathed in one week and has nothing to live for. Seemed very depressed and stated that death was the answer. [M.] has had mental health counselling in North Dakota at "Northwest Mental Health Center" involving his girlfriend committing suicide several years ago. He is also on criminal probation in N. Dakota for burglary and has violated his probation in leaving that state. Found in his possession was an article called "Near Death Experiences" that he had been reading, in which he copied an "epitaph" from. The Intake Sheet at the mental health center classified M.H. as a Baker Act patient and the Sheriff's report with suicide notes were attached to the Intake Sheet and presented to the crisis center counsellor to interview the patient and prepare the evaluation. The crisis center counsellor who interviewed M.H. and prepared the summary in exhibit 5, Kris Millrose, holds a master's degree in counselling and worked two nights per week at the crisis center. His normal procedure is to interview the client and make notes. He had available the information prepared by Deputy Sheriff Burton when he interviewed M.H. He made no effort to verify conflicts in what M.H. told him and what was contained in the Sheriff's report. He does not recall what he told Respondent during the telephone call, but he deemed it important to share with the doctor that patient had been brought in suicidal and the reasons given on the Baker Act form. He does not recall Respondent questioning him about the suicide notes but believed their existence would have been relayed to the doctor. Respondent concurred with Millrose's evaluation of M.H. and ordered him released. Millrose's evaluation recites: Pt to CSU as a 21-year old white male, unemployed, single and at large. Pt is on BA-52 via HCSO who found pt parked on state property. Pt states he had been sitting for a long time in this spot drinking beer thinking about his girlfriend in South Dakota and feeling sad over not having job and no place to live. Pt states his main concern was having very little money and no job. Patient was not aware he could go to the Salvation Army. Pt was thinking about suicide this afternoon, but adamantly denies being suicidal at present. Pt states the man who towed his truck today at the request of HCSO offered pt a job and possibly a place to stay. Pt states there is no work in South Dakota and his girlfriend just started college. Pt had been to Tampa one year ago when he decided to come back here. Pt denies trying to hook up a hose to his exhaust pipe. Pt states HCSO found him sitting in the back of his pick-up truck drinking beer. Pt states loving life and knows there is hope regardless of the notes he wrote to his mother and girlfriend. Pt does not appear a danger to himself or others at this time. He is planning on getting a job here or going back to Atlanta where he spent a day on his way to Tampa. Pt states having a little money left as he spent some last night staying in a motel. Pt requested something to eat and was given something. Following his release around 10:00 p.m., M.H. telephoned the wrecker company to see if he could pick up his vehicle and was told he would need a release from the Sheriff. M.H. then made his way across town to the lot where his truck was impounded, climbed the fence, entered his vehicle and drove it through the locked gate around 11:00 p.m. The Sheriff's office called the crisis center to obtain the name of the counsellor and doctor who authorized the release of M.H. Two days later M.H. partially decomposed body was discovered in north Pasco County in the cab of his vehicle with a hose connected to the exhaust leading to the cab. Crisis counsellors report several patients to the doctor during one telephone call. Millrose doesn't recall any specific details of his conversation except that after M.H. had been ordered released and he received the call from the Sheriff's office he again called Respondent to report the incident regarding the truck and Respondent stated patient had an antisocial personality disorder and should be put in jail. Millrose advised the Sheriff's office that M.H. should be arrested. Following four suicides by patients released from the crisis center in 1986 and 1987 it came to the attention of the public through newspaper articles and to the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services that several individuals referred to crisis centers under Baker Act procedures had been released without adequate evaluation and had committed suicide. As a result of these inquiries Respondent's attention was recalled to the incident involving M.H. more than one year after October 2, 1986. It was at this time he first reviewed the file and actions that had been taken. This time frame is significant in evaluating Respondent's testimony. Contrary to Millrose's recollection of the specifics of his evaluation of M.H., Respondent testified that he recalls Millrose advising him that M.H. had been brought to the crisis center by a deputy sheriff when M.H. was found attempting to hook up a hose to his exhaust, but that M.H. denied that ever happened. He recalls being told by Millrose that M.H. stated he had been offered a job by the man driving the wrecker, that M.H. was neat in appearance, was not suicidal and exhibited no psychotic symptoms, that patient had some money and a supportive girlfriend. He recalls being told by Millrose that M.H. was picked up on State property drinking beer in his truck, that he had contemplated suicide earlier but was now no longer suicidal. He further testified Millrose didn't tell him about the suicide notes, didn't tell him M.H. had come from South Dakota and was out of work, but that he (Respondent) had discussed the status of the patient and whether M.H. was a danger to himself. Respondent's testimony that he learned of the suicide of M.H. over a year after the incident and first reviewed the records after that, coupled with Millrose's testimony that several cases would be discussed with the psychiatrist during each phone call, renders Respondent's detailed recollection of the telephone conversation with Millrose totally lacking in credibility. Petitioner's expert witness opined that the evidence of lethality contained in the BA-52 and the suicide notes was overwhelming. These included the age and sex of M.H., the fact that he was a long way from home and the availability of supportive services, that he had been drinking alcohol, that he had no job and little money, that he was apprehended in the process of committing suicide, the suicide notes, and the article he had been reading "Near Death Experiences." All expert witnesses who testified in these proceedings agreed that the evidence accompanying the BA-52 clearly indicated M.H. was a danger to himself and should not have been released. Petitioner's and Respondent's experts disagreed only in whether Respondent's actions were in accordance with acceptable medical standards if he was told only what was contained in the narrative prepared by Millrose in exhibit 5. In any case Respondent prepared no records other than those prepared by Millrose to justify overturning the recommendation for further evaluation on the BA-52. Those records are inadequate to justify M.H.'s release especially without face-to-face consultation with a psychiatrist or other health professional qualified to make such a determination. The policy of the Hillsborough Community Health Center at this time was that during hours no psychiatrist was on duty at the crisis center patients who were Baker Acted were interviewed by one of the crisis counsellors who made an assessment based upon the BA-52 and the interview, then called the psychiatrist on call to relay the information obtained from the BA-52 and the interview to the doctor who had the final authority to determine whether the patient should be released forthwith or held until face-to-face interview with a qualified health professional was completed. Once a law enforcement officer has presented an involuntary patient to the crisis center for evaluation, it is incumbent on the psychiatrist on duty (on call) to inquire into the facts giving rise to the reasons for the law enforcement officer to conclude the patient is a danger to himself or to others, and to fully inquire into the facts upon which the crisis counsellor concludes to the contrary. Regardless of what Respondent was told by Millrose it is clear that he did not make such inquiries. In failing to fully inquire into the facts upon which Millrose concluded M.H. was not a danger to himself, Respondent delegated the determination that was his alone to make to Millrose and thereby failed to practice medicine with the requisite standard of care, skill and treatment which is recognized by a reasonably prudent similar physician as being acceptable under similar conditions and circumstances. In failing to document any facts upon which he determined that M.H. was not a danger to himself despite the information contained in the BA-52 and in failing to document reasons for concluded that M.H. suffered from an antisocial personality disorder, Respondent failed to keep medical records justifying the actions taken. Despite the practice at the crisis center to the contrary, Rule 10E- 5.47, Florida Administrative Code, which was in effect on October 2, 1986 and Section 493.463, Florida Statutes (1985), provides that a person for whom an involuntary examination has been initiated by filing a BA-52 shall not be released by the receiving facility or its contractor without the documented approval of a person who is qualified under the provisions of this chapter to initiate an involuntary examination, i.e., a physician, psychologist licensed pursuant to Chapter 490, psychiatric nurse or clinical worker. The practice of releasing involuntary Baker Acted clients after a telephone report to the psychiatrist conflicts with the intent of this section of the statutes. However, it was the practice at the Hillsborough County Mental Health Center for intake counsellors to evaluate patients brought in during evening hours when no psychiatrist was on duty, telephone the on-call psychiatrist and apprise him of the information contained in the BA-52 and of the counsellor's evaluation of the patient, at which time the psychiatrist would order the patient held for further evaluation or released. Respondent's expert witnesses, who opined that Respondent did not fail to practice medicine with the requisite standards of care, all based their opinions on hypothetical questions which assumed that Respondent was not made aware of the suicide notes; was not aware of the epitaph found with the suicide notes; was not aware that M.H. had previously received mental health counselling when his girlfriend committed suicide a few years ago; was not aware that M.H. had not eaten or bathed for a week; was not aware patient had stated death was the answer; and was not aware M.H. was in possession of a article entitled "Near Death Experiences", when apprehended; but was told that M.H.'s main concern was having little money, however he had been offered a job and possibly a place to stay by the driver of the wrecker who had picked up his truck; that M.H. appeared relieved when told he could find a room for the night at the Salvation Army; that M.H. did not appear to be a danger to himself, was in good spirits, his mental status was within normal limits, he was cooperative, and his memory and judgment was intact; and that M.H. denied any present intent to commit suicide. In answer to the question regarding his general recollection of the contents of the telephone call between Millrose and Respondent on October 2, 1986, Respondent testified that he was told that the BA-52 stated M.H. had been trying to hook up a hose to his exhaust, that patient had expressed feeling suicidal; that after being picked up by the police he (M.H.) was with the driver of the wrecker who offered him a job and possibly a place to stay; that the patient appeared properly attired and neat in appearance; that he did not present any psychiatric symptoms; that patient had money for a overnight stay in a motel and was now looking forward to obtaining a job; and also that patient had a supportive girlfriend in the environment. According to Respondent, Millrose concluded M.H. should be given a chance to go ahead, and made this recommendation to Respondent following a diagnosis of adjustment disorder with depressed moods. In this regard it is noted that M.H.'s girlfriend was in South Dakota and could hardly provide support. No explanation was offered for the failure of Millrose or Respondent to resolve the conflict in the statement M.H. gave to Millrose that he spent last night in a motel and M.H.'s statement to the deputy sheriff that he hadn't eaten or bathed in one week. All expert witnesses concurred that the narrative contained in the BA- 52 supporting the officer's conclusions that M.H. was a danger to himself, fully supported this conclusion and described an individual with a very high suicide potential, i.e., a highly lethal patient. Millrose acknowledged that he would have considered the suicide notes significant information to pass on to the psychiatrist before the patient was ordered released, but Respondent denies ever being made aware of the suicide notes or of any of the information contained in the BA-52 narrative indicating the lethality of M.H.'s actions prior to and after he was picked up by the deputy sheriff and brought to the crisis center. As noted above, Respondent's testimony in this regard is not credible.

Recommendation It is recommended that Hussain be assessed an administrative fine of $10,000.00 and placed on probation for two years under such terms and conditions as the Board of Medicine deems appropriate. RECOMMENDED this 11th day of March, 1991, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. K. N. AYERS Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904)488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 11th day of March, 1991. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 90-4699 Proposed findings submitted by Petitioner are accepted except for: 10. The portion of the first sentence "including all of the above relevant observations which supported his opinion." The BA-52 narrative did not contain all of the facts referred to in proposed findings 8. See HO #10. Although Deputy Burton briefed the "intake person" no evidence was presented that she passed any such additional information on to Millrose. 14. No evidence was presented that a Suicide Rating Scale was available to the crisis counsellors at the CSU. Certainly no such scale was used in this case. 37. M.H. was released from the CSU following a telephone call to Respondent who authorized the release of M.H. Proposed findings submitted by Respondent are accepted except for: 6. Rejected in part. No credible evidence was presented regarding the scope of the annual survey of the CSU by HRS personnel. 29. Rejected in part. Millrose testified that while he does not recall specific details of his interview with M.H. some 5 years ago, he would normally read all of the information presented with the BA-52. 33. Rejected in part. Millrose did not recall the specific detail that the call regarding M.H. was combined with calls about other clients. Rejected as fact. Accepted as testimony of Respondent. Rejected insofar as inconsistent with HO #12. The summary prepared by Millrose was substantially relayed to Respondent during this telephone call. Rejected. Second sentence rejected. 41. Accepted only insofar as Millrose was convinced M.H. did not meet the criteria for involuntary commitment. Rejected that this was common practice. Accepted that this practice was prevalent. Rejected. Rejected. 47. Second sentence rejected. The requirement for record keeping is that the records be adequate to justify the treatment given. COPIES FURNISHED: Mary B. Radkins, Esquire Department of Professional Regulation 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792 Rodney W. Morgan, Esquire Galloway Executive Center, Suite 110 3333 Henderson Boulevard Tampa, Florida 33609 Dorothy Faircloth, Executive Director Florida Board of Medicine Northwood Centre, Suite 60 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0750 Jack McRay, General Counsel Department of Professional Regulation Northwood Centre, Suite 60 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792

Florida Laws (1) 458.331
# 1
MARGIE ROBINSON vs. DIVISION OF RETIREMENT, 85-003349 (1985)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 85-003349 Latest Update: Jun. 27, 1986

The Issue The issues to be decided concern the question of the entitlement of the Petitioner to receive retirement benefits envisioned by Section 121.091(7)(c)1., Florida Statutes, related to the alleged in-line-of-duty death of her husband, Eddie Lee Robinson, Jr.

Findings Of Fact From January 7, 1969, until his death on April 12, 1984, Eddie Lee Robinson, Jr., served as a deputy sheriff in Gadsden County, Florida. In May 1971 the deceased was made a shift commander with that department and those were his duties from that period until the end. He held the rank of Captain at the time of his death. In his capacity as a shift supervisor, Eddie Lee Robinson, Jr., was in charge of the overall sheriff's office for part of the day. In essence, Robinson was the senior officer in charge while actively serving as a shift commander. The shift which Robinson worked would vary over time. The normal work week for Robinson at the time of his death was 46 to 50 hours. During his employment with the Gadsden County sheriff's office, Captain Robinson had been enrolled in the Florida Retirement System. Robinson had married Petitioner Margie Robinson, formerly Margie Rittman Mashhurn, on August 18, 1980, and was married to the Petitioner at the time of his death. In early October 1983 Eddie Lee Robinson, Jr., experienced an onset of severe chest pain syndrome. At that time he was seen by Dr. Earl Britt, a licensed physician in the state of Florida, who is board eligible in cardiology. In the patient history given to Dr. Britt at the time, Robinson indicated that he had a cardio-respiratory complaint as early as 1975 and was seen in an emergency room for that condition. The chest pain that he suffered on that occasion persisted off and on from that date forward and became more pronounced in the several weeks prior to the October 1983 visit with Dr. Britt. At that point in time Robinson complained of shortness of breath, even with limited physical activity. In 1976 Robinson had been diagnosed as suffering with diabetes and was taking medication for that condition. In October 1983 Robinson was overweight and suffered from hypertension. When seen by Dr. Britt on this occasion, Robinson was a smoker who had used a pack of cigarettes a day for approximately 35 years. At the time of his visit in October 1983 Robinson indicated that he had experienced what Dr. Britt describes as postcoital chest discomfort, some emotionally provoked chest pain and postprandial chest pain. Upon the recommendation of Dr. Britt, Robinson submitted himself to a coronary arteriogram which was done on October 4, 1983. This catherization process was performed by Dr. Charles C. Bianco, a licensed Florida physician who specializes in diagnostic radiology and, in particular, cardiovascular radiology. Dr. Bianco is a board certified radiologist. The results of the coronary arteriogram which Dr. Bianco performed revealed blockages ranging from 95% to 100% in the coronary arteries of three vessels. Given these facts, Dr. Britt recommended that Captain Robinson submit himself to by- pass surgery to correct these conditions. Captain Robinson declined this treatment, opting instead to be treated with medication provided by Dr. Britt. Following the October 1983 episode, Captain Robinson returned to his duties with the Gadsden County Sheriff's Office. His employer was aware of Robinson's heart condition when he returned to work. At the time of his death and those days before his death, Captain Robinson was on regular duty for the sheriff's office as a shift commander. The sheriff's office had made provision for him to take an hour off at the end of his shift to exercise by walking on those days when his shift ended around 6:00 p.m. This arrangement was not carried out if his duties demanded that he remain at his post throughout the entire shift sequence. In the late evening of April 10, 1984, Captain Robinson was summoned to the Gadsden County jail to assist the chief jailer, Lieutenant Cecil Morris. In particular, Lieutenant Morris was experiencing problems with an inmate, Morris Brown, who was incarcerated for attempted armed robbery and some form of aggravated battery or assault. Brown was a juvenile who had been adjudicated under the criminal law system pertaining to adults. He was some 6'1" and 200 pounds. Brown was a problem inmate who had destroyed lockers within the jail. On the night in question when Captain Robinson was summoned to the jail around 8:00 or 9:00 p.m., Brown had flooded his jail cell. Robinson and Morris entered the jail cell and Robinson talked to Brown to try to calm the inmate down. In doing so, Robinson shook a can of mace and told Brown that if Brown did not calm down, Robinson would have to mace him. Brown responded by indicating that he wished that Robinson would do that so that he could sue him. Brown also told Robinson, "If I get out, I know where you live." Eventually, Brown became less belligerent. Robinson then explained to Brown that they were going to have to put handcuffs on him, to which Brown replied that nobody was going to cuff him. Robinson and Morris then took the prisoner by the arms and moved him toward a bed or bunk within the cell. While this was transpiring, the prisoner pulled away from Morris, causing Morris to have to grab his arm again. Subsequently, Brown was moved back toward the bunk and pulled down to the bunk's surface. While Brown was seated on the bunk, a third officer put cuffs on him, and Brown struggled while this was being achieved. Throughout this episode Brown's basic demeanor evidenced antagonism. The situation with Morris Brown lasted for a period of five to fifteen minutes. Captain Robinson's reputation in his law enforcement work was that of an officer who was able to diffuse difficult situations with persons he encountered in his law enforcement work by talking to them as opposed to physical confrontation. Nonetheless, there were occasions where Robinson was called upon to physically subdue prisoners. In the experience of Lieutenant Morris, the previously described circumstance was the only occasion in which Robinson had been observed to interact physically with a prisoner. The extent of that physical confrontation did not include exchange of punches between the participants. When Captain Robinson returned home following the incident with Brown, he discussed that situation with his wife. The discussion was held on that same evening or the early hours of the following morning. His remarks and physical appearance pointed out how disturbed he was about the Brown incident. He seemed despondent. In the course of the conversation, Robinson took nitroglycerin because of his physical condition. He had not taken nitroglycerin for an identifiable period prior to that evening. (Nitroglycerin had been prescribed by Dr. Britt for Captain Robinson's heart condition.) Robinson remarked to his wife that he was "hurting." He told her that the prisoner Brown had flooded the jail cell and he had to go in and help restrain the prisoner. This was only the third incident, to the knowledge of his wife, in which Robinson had physically struggled with someone while performing his duties. On the following day, Captain Robinson went off duty. He visited with his mother, Lena Robinson, on a couple of occasions during that day and talked to two of his acquaintances, Luke McCray and King Baker. While in the presence of his mother and the other two individuals, there was no indication of pain on the part of Captain Robinson, nor did he use any medication. In their presence he did not appear troubled. In the late night of April 11 or early morning of April 12, 1984, while at home, Captain Robinson complained to his wife that he could not breathe. He took two nitroglycerin, began to have cold sweats and expired, having suffered a fatal heart attack described as an acute myocardial infarction, sudden death syndrome. At the time of his death, Eddie Lee Robinson, Jr., was 50 years old. Dr. Britt is qualified to give expert medical opinion testimony on the question of the cause of death of Eddie Lee Robinson, Jr. Those qualifications are based upon Dr. Britt's training and experience as a physician and specialist in cardiology, his familiarity with the deceased's underlying health and his knowledge of the basic facts of Robinson's encounter with Brown, the remarks of the Petitioner about the deceased's condition on the evening of the Brown incident when the deceased returned home and the explanation of the death approximately 26 to 28 hours later. In remarking on these matters, in his deposition of May 22, 1986, at page 9 under questioning by counsel for the Petitioner, Dr. Britt said: Assuming these facts, Doctor, within a reasonable degree of medical probability, is it your medical opinion that the struggle at the jail that night caused the death of E.L. Robinson? A I can answer that in the hypothetical fashion by stating that there are well- documented markers as to what will trigger a stable anginal pattern in a patient with documented coronary artery disease being emotional provocation with physical exertion as a very common trigger for what we call the inciting event for a fatal result. If you give the clinical scenario that you have just described and ask me to mark it, use it as an index marker of likely cause and effect, it would be very high as a probable cause of the effect that occurred to him within the next 24 to 36 hours as the inciting or provocative cause. Q Within a reasonable degree of medical probability then, it could be stated that the struggle at the jail precipitated the cardiological event that resulted in E. L. Robinson's death? A It would be reasonable to say that this was the inciting event that caused an unstable setting to occur out of which a sudden death syndrome could arise. Having considered these remarks by Dr. Britt, it is concluded that within a reasonable degree of medical probability the encounter between the deceased and Brown was the precipitating event of the death of Captain Robinson. Dr. Bianco, who had knowledge of the Robinson case and the patient's death, felt that the overall condition of the patient, that is significant coronary artery disease and the fact of participation in a job which was much too stressful for his physical condition, was more likely the cause of death than the specific incident with Brown. That condition is made the more threatening, according to Dr. Bianco, due to the patient's habit of smoking, the patient's diabetes and high blood pressure and obesity. Dr. Bianco emphasized the effect of stress as a contributing factor in the patient's demise. However, in the final analysis, Dr. Bianco defers to Dr. Britt on the subject of the causation of Captain Robinson's death, and for that reason the opinion of Dr. Bianco is discounted and does not form the basis of fact determination on the question of the causation of the death of Captain Robinson.

Florida Laws (5) 120.57121.021121.09190.70490.803
# 2
VIRGINIA RYAN vs. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, 80-000592 (1980)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 80-000592 Latest Update: Aug. 19, 1980

The Issue At issue herein is whether or not the Petitioner is entitled to continue receiving vocational rehabilitation benefits.

Findings Of Fact Based upon my observation of the witnesses and their demeanor while testifying, the arguments of the parties and the entire record compiled herein, the following relevant facts are found. Ms. Virginia Ryan, Petitioner, has been a client in the Vocational Rehabilitation program since September of 1978. Pursuant to an administrative review by her counselor and specialist assigned to the Vocational Rehabilitation program, Petitioner was advised on February 1, 1980, that she was being terminated from the Vocational Rehabilitation program for the following reasons: Petitioner's case had been active since September, 1978, without accomplishment vocationally. Vocational Rehabilitation services had expended approximately Two Thousand ($2,000.00) Dollars to rehabilitate Petitioner, with no visible results from such expenditures. Work evaluation reports completed for Petitioner at Jackson Memorial Hospital Rehabilitation Center indicate that Petitioner was not trainable or employable. Petitioner's participation in two vocational training sessions were without success. Counselors for vocational rehabilitative services who had serviced and counseled Petitioner concluded, based on the foregoing, that further expenditure of Federal funds would not result in any gainful employment for Petitioner. Petitioner charges that her counselor, Mrs. Harriet B. Weaver, was unprofessional and had sabotaged her training program at Charron Williams Vocational Center; had practiced reverse discrimination with respect to her counseling and efforts to rehabilitate her vocationally; was incompetent to carry out any program to rehabilitate her and had sabotaged her efforts to obtain services through a dental program. Harriet Weaver, a Vocational Rehabilitation counselor since approximately January of 1976, was assigned to service Petitioner during approximately April of 1979. Mrs. Weaver examined Petitioner's medical history file and accepted her as an orthopedic disability client. (Respondent's Composite Exhibit 1.) During the period April, 1979, through February, 1980, Mrs. Weaver assigned Petitioner to approximately four dentists and enrolled her in the rehabilitation program at Charron Williams Vocational School. During this period, Mrs. Weaver also obligated the Vocational Rehabilitation program to defray lodging expenses for Petitioner at the Cadillac Hotel in the amount of approximately Two Hundred ($200.00) Dollars. The evidence also reveals that the program expended approximately Eight Hundred Seventy-seven ($877.00) Dollars to Petitioner in taxi fares, of which approximately 70 percent represented unauthorized fares for taxicab services. Evidence also reveals that Petitioner has repeatedly appeared late for scheduled appointments with dentists, doctors, therapists, and for that matter, she arrived at the subject hearing approximately thirty (30) minutes late, with no explanation for her lateness. Doctors Wainger and Rudman determined that Petitioner was not employable and would not benefit from vocational rehabilitative training so long as her present attitude continued.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that the Respondent's termination of Petitioner from the Vocational Rehabilitation program be UPHELD. RECOMMENDED this 21st day of July, 1980, in Tallahassee, Florida. JAMES E. BRADWELL, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 101, Collins Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 21st Day of July, 1980. COPIES FURNISHED: Ms. Virginia Ryan 685 Northeast 64th Street Miami, Florida 33138 Morton Lightner, Esquire District 11 Legal Counsel Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services 401 Northwest 2nd Avenue, Room 1040 Miami, Florida 33128 Alvin J. Taylor, Secretary Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services 1321 Winewood Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Florida Laws (2) 120.57413.30
# 4
MEMORIAL HEALTHCARE GROUP, INC., D/B/A MEMORIAL HOSPITAL JACKSONVILLE vs AGENCY FOR HEALTHCARE ADMINISTRATION AND SHANDS JACKSONVILLE MEDICAL CENTER, INC., D/B/A UF HEALTH JACKSONVILLE, 14-000123CON (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tallahassee, Florida Jan. 08, 2014 Number: 14-000123CON Latest Update: Jul. 21, 2014

Conclusions THIS CAUSE came before the State of Florida, Agency for Health Care Administration (“the Agency") regarding Certificate of Need (“CON”) Application No. 10198, which sought the establishment of a 92-bed acute care general hospital, proposed to be located in Duval County, Florida, District 4. The Agency preliminarily approved the application. 1. On December 10, 2013, the Agency published notice of its preliminary decision to approve CON Application 10198, submitted by Shands Jacksonville Medical Center, Inc., d/b/a UF Health Jacksonville, which sought the establishment of a 92-bed acute care general hospital, proposed to be located in Duval County, Florida, District 4. 2. On December 30, 2013, Memorial Healthcare Group, Inc. d/b/a Memorial Hospital Jacksonville (“Memorial”), timely filed a petition for formal administrative hearing to contest the preliminary approval of CON Application 10198. 3. The matter was referred to the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH), where it was assigned Case No. 14-0123CON. Filed July 21, 2014 1:02 PM Division of Administrative Hearings 4. On July 3, 2014, Memorial filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal. 5. On July 7, 2014, the DOAH issued an Order Closing File and Relinquishing Jurisdiction to the Agency. It is therefore ORDERED: 6. The Agency’s preliminary decision to approve CON Application No. 10198 is UPHELD subject to the conditions noted in the State Agency Action Report. ORDERED in Tallahassee, Florida, on this f x day of eeley , 2014. Elizabeth Agency for Health Care Administration

Other Judicial Opinions A party who is adversely affected by this Final Order is entitled to judicial review, which shall be instituted by filing one copy of a notice of appeal with the Agency Clerk of AHCA, and a second copy, along with filing fee as prescribed by law, with the District Court of Appeal in the appellate district where the Agency maintains its headquarters or where a party resides. Review of proceedings shall be conducted in accordance with the Florida appellate rules. The Notice of Appeal must be filed within 30 days of rendition of the order to be reviewed. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of this Final Order was served on the below- BE 45 named persons by the method designated on this SL K day of a , 2014. —4 : FS Richard J. Shoop, Agency Clerk Agency for Health Care Administration 2727 Mahan Drive, Mail Stop #3 Tallahassee, Florida 32308 (850) 412-3630 R. Bruce McKibben Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings (Electronic Mail) Lorraine M. Novak, Esquire Office of the General Counsel Agency for Health Care Administration Lorraine. Novak@ahca.myflorida.com (Electronic Mail) Stephen A. Ecenia, Esquire Rutledge, Ecenia and Purnell, P.A. Post Office Box 551 Tallahassee, Florida 32302-0551 Steve@reuphlaw.com (Electronic Mail) Seann M. Frazier, Esquire Jonathan L. Rue, Esquire Parker, Hudson, Rainer and Dobbs, LLP 215 South Monroe Street, Suite 750 Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Sfrazier@phrd.com Jlr@phrd.com (Electronic Mail) Karl David Acuff, Esquire Law Offices of Karl David Acuff 1615 Village Square Blvd., Suite 2 Tallahassee, Florida 32309-2770 Kdacuff@fioridacourts.com (Electronic Mail) James McLemore, Supervisor Certificate of Need Unit Agency for Health Care Administration James.McLemore@ahca.myflorida.com (Electronic Mail) Marisol Fitch Health Services & Facilities Consultant Certificate of Need Unit Agency for Health Care Administration Marisol. Fitch@ahca.myflorida.com (Electronic Mail)

# 5
BOARD OF MEDICINE vs ASHOK M. PATEL, 98-002036 (1998)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tampa, Florida May 01, 1998 Number: 98-002036 Latest Update: Apr. 08, 1999

The Issue The issues for determination in this case are whether Respondent's license to practice medicine should be revoked or otherwise disciplined for the reasons set forth in the Administrative Complaint, specifically for: 1) Respondent's failure to meet the acceptable standard of care for psychiatry in not immediately admitting patient J.R. to an intensive in-patient care facility; 2) Respondent's failure to justify his failure to admit patient J.R. to an intensive in-patient care facility; and 3) Respondent's failure to maintain records which state why patient J.R. was not admitted to an intensive in-patient care facility.

Findings Of Fact Petitioner, Department of Health, is the state agency vested with the statutory authority to enforce the disciplinary standards for the practice of medicine under Chapters 455 and 458, Florida Statutes. Respondent, Ashok M. Patel, M.D., is and at all material times was, a physician licensed to practice medicine in Florida, having been issued license number ME 0066214. Respondent practices psychiatry in Largo, Florida. Respondent is board certified in psychiatry. On July 31, 1996, Patient J.R. was referred for an appointment to Respondent by Professional Psychological Services (hereinafter PPS), a mental health care provider with which Respondent was contractually affiliated. At this time J.R. was a 44-year-old white male who was employed as a paramedic, and later as a firefighter for the City of Clearwater. J.R. had worked in this capacity for over 19 years. J.R. was happily married to P.R. for more than 11 years. The couple had no children. In the weeks preceding his appointment with Respondent, J.R. was experiencing severe depression. The primary basis of J.R.'s depression was chronic health problems. J.R. had a history of back problems which began in 1980. He had back surgery in 1989, and suffered from psoriatic arthritis in his back which adversely affected his ability to function effectively as a paramedic and later as a firefighter. In July of 1996, J.R. had the job of driver of the firetruck. In July of 1996, J.R. was under the care of his primary physician Dr. Mark Smitherman, as well as a rheumatolgist, Dr. Adam Rosen, who prescribed medicine for J.R.'s chronic pain. On July 22, 1996, during an appointment with Dr. Smitherman, J.R. expressed his feelings of depression. Dr. Smitherman suggested that J.R. contact PPS, the psychological services provider of J.R.’s employment insurance plan. An appointment with PPS was thereafter scheduled for July 31, 1996. J.R. also had previously expressed his feelings of depression to Dr. Rosen who had prescribed Serzone, an anti-depressant for J.R. J.R. went to work at the firehouse on Monday, July 29, 1996. At some time during the evening while the other firefighters were asleep, J.R. removed a defibrillator from the firetruck, went to a private room, and used the defibrillator on himself in an unsuccessful attempt to commit suicide. The following morning of Tuesday, July 30, 1996, J.R. returned home at approximately 8:00 a.m., and telephoned his wife, P.R., who was already at work. J.R. informed his wife of his suicide attempt. P.R. immediately went home and called PPS, explained the circumstances, and requested an earlier appointment. Arrangements were made with PPS to reschedule J.R. from his existing appointment on Wednesday, July 31, 1996, to an appointment July 30, 1996, at 7:00 p.m. Later that day, the appointment was moved up to 5:00 p.m. When J.R. and his wife arrived at PPS they met with Betti Pate, a licensed mental health counselor employed by PPS. During the course of her evaluation, Betti Pate noted that J.R. was severely depressed with a suicide attempt within the previous 24 hours. Ms. Pate in her care plan for J.R. identified three problems, depression, fear of being left alone, and suicidal ideation. Under intervention, she noted, "prevent suicide, daily observation." Betti Pate’s note to her supervisor stated that J.R. was fearful, very depressed and negative. She also noted that J.R. was "afraid he’ll try again if alone." After Betti Pate’s evaluation on July 30, 1996, her supervisors at PPS recommended that J.R. enter a Partial Hospitalization Program (PHP) at Charter Behavioral Health System of Medfield Hospital (Charter). The PHP at Charter was a mental health counseling program which was conducted during the day at the hospital. The primary focus of the Charter PHP was mental health therapy provided in group settings with licensed mental health counselors. The care plan for J.R. was to provide partial hospitalization at Charter during the day while his wife was at work. J.R. would then return home to his wife in the evening. Under this arrangement J.R. would not be alone for extended periods of time. Admission to the PHP at Charter required the concurrence of an admitting psychiatrist. Because the other psychiatrists employed by PPS were unavailable, an appointment was made for J.R. to be evaluated by Respondent who, although in private practice, had an affiliate agreement with PPS to render mental health services to referred patients. PPS made an appointment for J.R. to see Respondent on Wednesday, July 31, 1996, at 4:00 p.m. It was common and usual practice for PPS to refer patients to Respondent for evaluation prior to admission to PHP, as well as for evaluation of a patient’s medications. J.R. went alone to his appointment with Respondent. Prior to seeing Respondent, J.R. completed a patient information document. J.R. described his reason for visit as "mental health & coping problem." He circled the following problems which pertained to him: nervousness, anxiety, insomnia, stress, headaches, overwhelmed, obsessive thoughts, compulsive behavior, depression, loneliness, fears, suicidal thoughts, concentration, appetite changes, helpless/hopeless, low energy, sexual problems, impulsive behavior, medical problems, and physical pain. J.R. listed the medications he was taking as Serzone 150 mg (10 day), Lortab 7.5/500, Robaxin 750 mg. J.R. indicated that he had not received prior psychiatric treatment. After completion of the patient information document, J.R. was seen by Respondent. Respondent observed that J.R. was casually dressed and not dishelveled, was articulate, made eye contact, was appropriately aware of time and place, and able to communicate effectively. Respondent asked J.R. the nature of the problem that had brought J.R. to him. Respondent then conducted a medical history, a family history, and a history of the problems leading to the visit to Respondent. In the course of his evaluation of J.R., Respondent completed a clinical assessment form which included a DSMIV diagnosis. According to Respondent’s records J.R. stated as "chief complaint" that "I was referred by PPS." In history of present illness, Respondent notes that: "Patient is 44 year-old white male came in complaining of chronic back pain, decreased sleep agitation, irritability." Patient says he is feeling depressed, says he tried to kill himself using defibrillator on Monday, but says it did not work. Patient had suicidal thoughts for 1-2 weeks, but feels guilty about doing it. Says it was stupid to hurt himself. Weight loss of 14 pounds in two and one-half months, decreased appetite. No SI(suicial ideation)/ No HI(homicidal ideation)/ No AH(auditory hallucinations)/ No VH(visual hallucinations)/ No PI(paranoid ideation) at present. During the course of Respondent’s evaluation, J.R. related that he had been seen at PPS on July 30, 1996, that he had an appointment to see Betti Pate the following day, and that arrangements were being made by PPS for him to begin PHP at Charter; however, Respondent did not have J.R.’s PPS evaluation nor Betti Pate’s notes at the time of J.R.’s office visit. J.R. also related that he had a supportive wife, although Respondent did not have any personal contact with Mrs. J.R. at this time. Respondent’s evaluation of J.R. lasted over one hour. In his diagnosis Respondent determined that J.R. had major severe depression, and that J.R. presented a moderate suicide risk. In his recommendation/plan for J.R. Respondent’s notes reflect the following: "Increased Serzone 100mg two Bid; continue out-patient counseling; start Xanax 0.25 mg. 1/2-1 tid prn.; follow up in 2 weeks; and, made aware of 24 hours availability." Respondent also advised rest for 2 weeks. At this time Respondent did not know when J.R. would begin PHP at Charter. After leaving Respondent’s office J.R. went home and expressed to his wife some difficulty in understanding Respondent who is a native of India. The next day Thursday, August 1, 1996, Mrs. J.R. contacted PPS to inquire about J.R. seeing a different psychiatrist. Neither J.R. nor Mrs. J.R. contacted Respondent, and PPS did not refer J.R. to another psychiatrist. Because of J.R.’s use of the defibrillator, PPS requested medical clearance from J.R.’s primary care physician Dr. Smitherman prior to admission to PHP at Charter. On Thursday, August 1, 1996, J.R. telephoned Dr. Smitherman and received medical clearance to begin PHP at Charter. J.R. was scheduled to begin PHP at Charter on Monday August 5, 1996. J.R. received no mental health therapy or counseling from the time he left Respondent’s office on Wednesday, July 31, 1996, until Monday, August 5, 1996, when he arrived at Charter. J.R. spent some of this time doing routine shopping, errands and going to the beach where he regularly exercised by swimming. J.R. and his wife also discussed future plans together. On Monday, August 5, 1996, J.R. was admitted to PHP at Charter. At this time Charter telephoned Respondent for admission instructions for J.R., which Respondent as the attending physician gave for J.R. During the course of the day, J.R. attended group therapy sessions at Charter. The Charter records indicate that J.R. presented a flat appearance, and was not actively engaged in the therapy sessions. The following day, Tuesday August 6, 1996, J.R. had a previously scheduled appointment with his rheumotolgist, Dr. Rosen. Because of this previously scheduled appointment J.R. was allowed to miss his therapy sessions at Charter on August 6, 1996, with the understanding that he would return and continue his therapy at Charter on Wednesday August 7, 1996. On Tuesday, August 6, 1996, J.R. went to his appointment with Dr. Rosen. At some time after leaving Dr. Rosen’s office J.R. returned home and committed suicide by hanging himself in the garage where his wife found him later that day. Respondent had no contact with J.R. subsequent to July 31, 1996. Three expert witnesses in the field of psychiatry presented testimony in this matter: Dr. Martin Rosenthal; Dr. Arturo Gonzalez; and, Dr. Daniel Sprehe. All three expert witnesses concur that Respondent’s diagnosis of J.R. was correct and met the appropriate standard of care. Moreover, all three expert witnesses agree that Respondent’s prescribed medications for J.R. were correct and met the appropriate standard of care. While Drs. Gonzalez and Sprehe opined that Respondent’s treatment plan for J.R. was appropriate, Dr. Rosenthal testified that Respondent’s treatment of J.R. in "certain limited ways" did not meet the standard of care. Specifically, Dr. Rosenthal opined that even though J.R. was a moderate suicide risk, he would have hospitalized J.R. The medical literature submitted as part of the record in this case is consistent in stating that suicide in an individual patient is not a predictable event. The factors that are considered by psychiatrists in evaluating the risk of suicide are subjective to the individual patient. In order to be of imminent risk, a patient must have suicidal intent, lethal means, and opportunity. All the experts in this case agree that Respondent made the proper diagnosis of J.R., which included a finding that when Respondent saw J.R., the patient had no suicidal ideation. At the time J.R. was seen by Respondent the evidence shows not only did J.R. have no present suicidal ideation, but he also expressed regret over having made a suicide attempt, and specifically stated to Respondent that he felt stupid about trying to hurt himself. The expert evidence is supported by the medical literature, that under such circumstances the appropriate standard of care does not require immediate hospitalization.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a Final Order be entered dismissing the February 3, 1998, Administrative Complaint against the Respondent, Ashok M. Patel, M.D. DONE AND ENTERED this 30th day of December, 1998, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. RICHARD A. HIXSON Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 30th day of December, 1998. COPIES FURNISHED: Kristina Sutter, Esquire Agency for Health Care Administration 2727 Mahan Drive Post Office Box 14229 Tallahassee, Florida 32317 A. S. Weekley, Jr., M.D., Esquire Holland & Knight 520 Vonderburg Drive, Suite 3005 Brandon, Florida 33511 Angela T. Hall, Agency Clerk Department of Health 2020 Capital Circle, Southeast Bin A-02 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1703 Dr. James Howell, Secretary Department of Health Bin A00 2020 Capital Circle, Southeast Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1701 Pete Peterson, General Counsel Department of Health 2020 Capital Circle, Southeast Bin A-02 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1703 Tanya Williams, Executive Director Board of Medicine Department of Health Northwood Centre 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0750

Florida Laws (1) 458.331 Florida Administrative Code (1) 64B8-9.003
# 6
BOARD OF NURSING vs. VERNON F. APPLEBY, 82-001750 (1982)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 82-001750 Latest Update: Feb. 14, 1984

Findings Of Fact Respondent is and has been a registered nurse having been issued license number 1006702. On August 18, 1981, Respondent was arrested and charged with conspiracy to sell or deliver a controlled substance, to wit: cocaine. On August 19, 1981, Respondent was arraigned, at which time he entered a written plea of not guilty. Also, on August 19, 1981, Respondent contacted the administrator of patient services at Jackson Memorial Hospital, where Respondent was employed as a nurse in the medical intensive care unit. He advised the administrator of the events of the prior day and likewise advised the head nurse of the medical intensive care unit of his problem. By that time, Respondent had achieved for himself an extraordinary reputation among his coworkers, his supervisors, and the management and medical personnel at Jackson Memorial Hospital as an extremely competent nurse who possessed unusual clinical knowledge and an unusual amount of sensibility to the needs of the individual patient and the patient's family. He was further considered to have the highest integrity and was held out as a role model of professionalism. However, the personnel policies of the Public Health Trust required that anyone charged with a criminal offense be automatically suspended. Accordingly, the administrator had no choice but to suspend Respondent from his employment effective August 19,198l. Respondent had been arrested in conjunction with approximately 60 to 70 other persons pursuant to an extensive investigation referred to by the Dade County State Attorney's office as "Operation Tick-Tock." The arrests resulted from wire taps placed on the telephone of a Roberto Ortega. Ortega had placed a telephone call to Respondent's roommate, but Respondent had answered the telephone. Respondent and Ortega had a brief conversation in which the word "cocaine" was never used and no reference was made to cocaine, and the conversation in and of itself could not be characterized as being even a "drug- related" conversation. This sole conversation in which Respondent answered the telephone when Ortega called Respondent's roommate was Respondent's only involvement in Operation Tick-Tock. Respondent hired an attorney to defend him and was required to pay a $10,000 retainer. Thereafter, additional amounts of money were required for his defense. Respondent's attorney believed Respondent was innocent. His attorney further believed that he would be successful in presenting a motion to suppress the tapes obtained pursuant to the wire tap on Ortega's phone but that, even if he were unsuccessful in his motion to suppress, Respondent would still be found not guilty by any jury. He told Respondent that the legal fees involved in defending the criminal charge would cost Respondent $100,000. Respondent could not afford such a legal fee. Respondent's attorney contacted the prosecutor handling the case and was advised that but for the fact that Respondent had been arrested as part of Operation Tick-Tock the State Attorney's office would have placed Respondent in a pretrial intervention program, which is a deferred prosecution program not resulting in any plea but rather resulting in dismissal of the charges after successful completion of the program. However, the State Attorney's office was not in a position to place any of the defendants in Operation Tick-Tock in the pretrial intervention program, since there had been extensive publicity regarding the investigation and arrests and the investigation had cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. The State Attorney's office did agree with Respondent's attorney, however, that in view of Respondent's minimal involvement, if any, in any criminal conduct it would agree, in spite of the publicity engendered by the case, to accept a plea of nolo contendere in exchange for a short term of probation. Respondent's attorney and the prosecutor conferred with Dade County Circuit Court Judge Gerald Kogan regarding their negotiations and the facts leading to Respondent's arrest. Based upon the proffered statement of facts, the judge agreed that he would accept a plea of nolo contendere, that he would place the Respondent on probation, and that he would withhold adjudication, which means that there is no finding of guilt and there is no conviction. Respondent's attorney discussed with him entry of the negotiated plea in view of Respondent's financial distress and Respondent's desire to return to work as soon as possible at Jackson Memorial Hospital. Respondent discussed the plea with the administration at Jackson Memorial and was advised that if he pled nolo contendere and if adjudication was withheld he would be returned to his prior position immediately with full back pay. Respondent's attorney sent a letter to Jackson Memorial confirming that information and further advising that Respondent desired to enter such a plea for the sake of convenience, since he could ill afford to litigate. On November 18, 1981, Respondent pled nolo contendere to the charge against him, adjudication of guilt was withheld and Respondent was placed on two years' probation. On that same date, he was reinstated to his former position in the medical intensive care unit of Jackson Memorial Hospital and received retroactive pay. In August 1982, Respondent's probation was modified to non-reporting status. On September 16, 1982, the wire taps used by the state on Ortega's telephone were found to be illegal, and all evidence obtained using the wire taps was suppressed by Dade County Circuit Court Judge Kogan. On December 22, 1982, Judge Kogan sealed the Respondent's criminal file and expunged his record, the effect of which is that Respondent is entitled to state that he has never been arrested for any crime, which answer can also be given under oath as in the case of an employment application. Both before and after August 18, 1981, Respondent has never had any disciplinary action taken against him and has never even had a complaint registered against him in the course of his employment. Both before and after August 18, 1981, there has never been a shortage reported in controlled substances in the medical intensive care unit at Jackson Memorial Hospital and Respondent has never even been charged with improper handling of any controlled substance. Respondent has never used cocaine and has never engaged in the sale or possession thereof. Respondent remains an exemplary employee, and nursing remains his chosen profession. His superiors consider that any suspension or revocation of Respondent's license would be a severe loss to the nursing profession itself. His ability to practice nursing has not been impaired.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a Final Order be entered finding the Respondent not guilty of the charges contained within the Administrative Complaint filed against him, dismissing the Administrative Complaint filed herein, and sealing the record in this proceeding in order to conform with the Order entered by Judge Kogan that no record exists regarding Respondent's arrest. DONE and RECOMMENDED this 27th day of September, 1983, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. LINDA M. RIGOT, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 27th day of September, 1983. COPIES FURNISHED: W. Douglas Moody, Jr., Esquire Helen P. Keefe, Executive 119 North Monroe Street Director Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Board of Nursing 111 East Coastline Drive, Alan E. Greenfield, Esquire Room 504 1000 Rivergate Plaza Jacksonville, Florida 32202 444 Brickell Avenue Miami, Florida 33131 Frederick Roche, Secretary Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Florida Laws (2) 120.57464.018
# 8
ST. VINCENT'S MEDICAL CENTER, INC. vs WEST JACKSONVILLE MEDICAL CENTER, INC., AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, 10-000390CON (2010)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tallahassee, Florida Jan. 26, 2010 Number: 10-000390CON Latest Update: Dec. 08, 2010

Conclusions THIS CAUSE comes before the AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (the "Agency") concerning the Certificate of Need (“CON”) 10059 Application which was filed by West Jacksonville Medical Center, Inc. (hereinafter West Jacksonville) to establish an 85-bed acute care hospital in the Second Batching Cycle of 2009. The Agency preliminarily approved West Jacksonville’s application. On January 26, 2010, St. Vincent filed a Petition for Formal Administrative Hearing challenging the Agency's approval, which was forwarded to the Division of Administrative Hearings (“DOAH”), by the Agency and assigned to an Administrative Law Judge. The parties have entered into a Settlement Agreement (Exhibit 2) which is attached hereto, and has been approved by the Antitrust Unit of the Office of the Attorney General, and being otherwise well advised in the premises: St. Vincent's Medical Center, Inc. v. AHCA (DOAH No.: 10-0390CON; AHCA No.: 2010000533; CON # 10059) Page 1 of 3 Filed December 8, 2010 9:20 AM Division of Administrative Hearings It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: 1. The attached Settlement Agreement is approved and adopted as part of this Final Order, and the parties are directed to comply with the terms of the Settlement Agreement. 2. CON No. 10059 is approved per the Settlement Agreement. DONE and ORDERED this 7 day of Z , 2010, in Tallahassee, Florida. Elizabeth Dudek, Interim Secretary Agency for Hgalth Care Administration

# 9
AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs JACKSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, 12-003817MPI (2012)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Miami, Florida Nov. 16, 2012 Number: 12-003817MPI Latest Update: Nov. 19, 2014

Conclusions THE PARTIES resolved all disputed issues and executed a Settlement Agreement. The parties are directed to comply with the terms of the attached settlement agreement. Based on the foregoing, this file is CLOSED. DONE and ORDERED on this the La * xy of Yorcnter , 2014, in Tallahassee, Florida. ~ Ly for ZABETH DUI@EK, SE@RETARY Agency for Health Care Administration 1 AHCA vs. Jackson Memorial Hospital, C.1. 11-1437-000 Final Order Filed November 19, 2014 3:21 PM Division of Administrative Hearings A PARTY WHO IS ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THIS FINAL ORDER IS ENTITLED TO A JUDICIAL REVIEW WHICH SHALL BE INSTITUTED BY FILING ONE COPY OF A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE AGENCY CLERK OF AHCA, AND A SECOND COPY ALONG WITH FILING FEE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW, WITH THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL IN THE APPELLATE DISTRICT WHERE THE AGENCY MAINTAINS ITS HEADQUARTERS OR WHERE A PARTY RESIDES. REVIEW PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FLORIDA APPELLATE RULES. THE NOTICE OF APPEAL MUST BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF RENDITION OF THE ORDER TO BE REVIEWED. Copies furnished to: Monica Galindo Stinson Assistant Attorney General Florida Bar No. 145785 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 110 S.E. 6th Street, 10th Floor Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 John Bajger, Bureau Chief Assistant Attorney General OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 110 S.E. 6th Street, 10th Floor Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Chris Kokoruda, Esq. Jackson Memorial Hospital 1611 N.W. 12th Ave., West Wing 109 Miami, Florida 33136 Counsel for Respondent Kelly Bennett, Chief Medicaid Program Integrity Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) Medicaid Program Integrity 2727 Mahan Drive, MS#3 Tallahassee, FL 32308 Shena L. Grantham Assistant General Counsel Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) Medicaid Program Integrity 2727 Mahan Drive, MS#3 Tallahassee, FL 32308 Finance and Accounting Health Quality Assurance 2 AHCA vs. Jackson Memorial Hospital, C.1. 11-1437-000 Final Order CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished to the above named addressees by U.S. Mail or other designated method on this the [¢° day of Note bd 2014. Richard J. Shoop, Esquire Agency Clerk State of Florida Agency for Health Care Administration 2727 Mahan Drive, MS #3 Tallahassee, Florida 32308-5403 (850) 412-3630/FAX (850) 921-0158 3 AHCA ys. Jackson Memorial Hospital, C.1. 11-1437-000 Final Order

# 10

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer