Tag Archives: reviews of The Health Law Firm

Virginia Medical Board Wins Appeal Concerning Doctor’s Revoked Medical License

4 Indest-2009-3By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

On March 21, 2017, a Virginia appellate court ruled that a doctor’s state medical license was properly revoked for various reasons including allowing medical students to perform unauthorized medical procedures. The appellate court said the doctor’s due process rights weren’t violated because he had three months to prepare for an administrative hearing before the Virginia Board of Medicine.

Medical License Was Properly Revoked.

When the doctor originally presented his case in the trial court, the trial judge ruled that Dr. John Hagmann’s constitutional rights were violated. The trial court decided that when the Virginia Board of Medicine denied the doctor’s second request for a postponement of an administrative proceeding it erred. The trial court judge reversed the Virginia Board of Medicine’s decision revoking his license.

The court of appeals later decided that the trial judge’s decision was erroneous and reversed it. The appellate court based its ruling on the fact that Dr. Hagmann had already received one continuance and had more than three months to prepare for his hearing. According to the appellate court, the medical board’s denial of a second continuance didn’t violate Dr. Hagmann’s due process rights.

While teaching courses at a federal military school in 2012 and 2013, Dr. Hagmann allegedly allowed the students to perform invasive medical procedures on himself and on each other. These medical procedures were allegedly unapproved and had no medicinal or therapeutic purposes, according to the medical board.

According to the court’s opinion, Dr. Hagmann was also accused of encouraging students to use alcohol and various drugs in unapproved and dangerous ways. It indicated that he also provided medical treatment, including writing prescriptions, without keeping adequate records.

To read the court’s opinion in full, click here.

Conclusion.

The Virginia appellate court decided that the circuit court, the lower court in the case, erred by substituting its discretion for the Board’s discretion. However, the court of appeal also held that the circuit court did not err in rejecting Dr. Hagmann’s claims that the Board violated his due process rights.

Therefore, the court of appeal reversed the circuit court’s ruling and remanded with directions that the decision of the Medical Board revoking Dr. Hagmann’s license to practice medicine should be reinstated.

To learn more about the consequences of having your professional medical license revoked, click here to read one of my prior blogs.

Author’s Comments:

The problem I have with this decision is that the board of medicine usually takes years to investigate such cases. Once the charges are filed, they want to rush to a hearing, often without giving the defense adequate time to prepare. I have experienced this time and time again. It behooves the defense to make a clear record of the time that the port of medicine has had to prepare, the prejudice that will occur to the defense, and the lack of prejudice to the board.

Additionally, since there was a trial in a trial court decision, the trial court judge was in a much better position to weigh the credibility of the witnesses and make the decisions that were made. In a case where there is only been one prior continuance granted, for the appellate court to reverse the trial court judge, seems unfair to me, especially since the result is the revocation of the Doctor’s license. I often refer to this as the “death sentence” for the Doctor’s career. There isn’t a harsher sentence that a board of medicine can give.

Contact Health Law Attorneys With Experience Handling Licensing Issues.

If you have had a license suspended or revoked, or are facing imminent action against your license, it is imperative that you contact an experienced healthcare attorney to assist you in defending your career. Remember, your license is your livelihood, it is not recommended that you attempt to pursue these matters without the assistance of an attorney.

The Health Law Firm routinely represents physicians, dentists, nurses, medical groups, clinics, and other healthcare providers in personal and facility licensing issues. To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Kang, Peter. “Va. Med Board Wins Appeal Over Doc’s License Revocation.” Law360. (March 21, 2017). Web.

 

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area. http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

 

KeyWords: Legal representation for licensing issues, medical license defense attorney, legal representation for revoked license, legal representation for Board of Medicine investigation, Board of Medicine investigation defense attorney, medical board appeals, legal representation for administrative law hearing, administrative hearing defense attorney, legal counsel for Board of Medicine hearing, legal representation for Department of Health investigations, Department of Health investigation defense attorney, appeal of revocations, legal representation for Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Hearings, administrative litigation defense attorney, legal representation for Federal Administrative Hearings, legal representation for Formal Administrative Hearings and Informal Administrative Hearings, legal representation for revocation hearings, The Health Law Firm reviews, reviews of The Health Law Firm

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2017 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Texas Appeals Court Affirms$1.37 Million in Sanctions Against Doctor who Sued Hospital Former Employers

4 Indest-2009-3By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

On November 16, 2016, an appeals court in Texas affirmed a $1.37 million sanction against a doctor. The physician was ordered to pay the fine after the dismissal of a defamation lawsuit he filed against his former employers. The decision affirmed that the actions of his former employers, Baylor College of Medicine (Baylor) and Texas Children’s Hospital, did not cause the litigation fees which the court assessed to the doctor as sanctions.

The case had previously made its way up to the Texas Supreme Court, which makes the November 16, 2016, opinion the second time the Texas Fourteenth Court of Appeals has weighed in on the case. Additionally, it is the second time it has held the sanctions were merited for Dr. Rahul K. Nath.

The Back Story of the Case.

According to the opinion, Dr. Nath was employed by Baylor as a plastic surgeon and was affiliated with Texas Children’s Hospital. He was fired in 2004 and in February 2006 filed a lawsuit against his former supervisor at Baylor and Texas Children’s. According to court documents, Dr. Nath had accused his former supervisor of making defamatory statements about him after he stopped working. The alleged defamatory statements included that Dr. Nath had been fired, was unqualified and lacked professional ethics and integrity. (Note: We are just stating what was alleged in the lawsuit.)

To read the opinion in full, click here.

Were the Former Employers Responsible for the Accumulated Attorney and Litigation Fees?

The court was considering whether the behavior of Baylor or Texas Children’s was ultimately responsible for the fees accumulated litigation fees and expenses in the case. Previously, the trial court found that both Texas Children’s and Baylor’s actions had not caused the expenses for which Dr. Nath was sanctioned. The trial court wrote that the amount was appropriate as it was “far less” than the actual fees incurred by either party in defending Dr. Nath’s claims.

On appeal, Dr. Nath argued that the trial court hadn’t held a proper evidentiary inquiry, that it had based its sanctions award on “conclusory and self-serving” affidavits. Dr. Nath claimed that he was wrongly denied discovery in the case. To learn more about Dr. Nath’s challenge, click here.

Despite Dr. Nath’s arguments, the Fourteenth Court disagreed, holding that the trial court followed the exact instructions from the Supreme Court before deciding to impose the sanctions. Additionally, the court found that there was evidence in the record to support the conclusion that neither Texas Children’s nor Baylor’s conduct caused the expenses that were passed on to Dr. Nath as sanctions.

Adequate Supporting Evidence.

The first time the case came before the Fourteenth Court of Appeals, it affirmed the sanctions against Dr. Nath. The high court held that there was evidence to support the trial court’s finding of bad faith and improper purpose on Dr. Nath’s part with regard to certain filings in the case.

Dr. Nath appealed, and the Texas Supreme Court held that the trial court didn’t abuse its discretion in finding the doctor had exercised bad faith and improper purpose in certain filings. The high court remanded it back to the trial court to consider to what extent, if any, Texas Children’s and Baylor’s actions may have “caused the expenses for which recovery is sought.”

After a hearing, the trial court determined that neither employer’s behavior caused the expenses, and again imposed the sanctions against Nath. In appealing that ruling to the Fourteenth Court of Appeals, Dr. Nath argued that the trial court had made procedural errors in hearings and evidence submission in reaffirming the sanctions.

The trial court granted Texas Children’s and Baylor’s motions in June 2010, and also sanctioned Dr. Nath $726,000 for a portion of Texas Children’s fees in defending the suit and $644,500 for a portion of Baylor’s. The Fourteenth Court of Appeals affirmed that ruling, and Dr. Nath appealed to the state Supreme Court.
To learn more about defamatory statements and how to handle such claims, click here to read one of my prior blogs.

Contact Experienced Health Law Attorneys.

The Health Law Firm routinely represents pharmacists, pharmacies, physicians, nurses and other health providers in Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) investigations, Medicare Audit defense, regulatory matters, licensing issues, litigation, inspections and audits involving the DEA, Department of Health (DOH) and other law enforcement agencies. Its attorneys include those who are board certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law as well as licensed health professionals who are also attorneys.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Knaub, Kelly. “Texas Appeals Court Affirms Doc’s $1.3M Sanction.” Law360. (November 16, 2016). Web.

Knaub, Kelly. “Doc To Challenge $1.3M Sanction Before Texas High Court.” Law360. (January 15, 2014). Web.

“Texas Appeals Court Affirms Doc’s $1.3M Sanction.” LexisNexis. (November 16, 2016). Web.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law is an attorney with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Avenue, Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Legal representation for health care professionals, health law defense attorney, legal representation for defamatory statements against health care professionals, legal representation for defamation lawsuit against a healthcare professional, healthcare litigation defense attorney, legal counsel for health care professionals, Legal representation for clients involved in the health care industry, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, The Health Law Firm
“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2017 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.