Matter of Ross v. State Board for Professional Medical Conduct
| Decision Date | 01 November 2007 |
| Docket Number | 501401 |
| Citation | 845 N.Y.S.2d 162,2007 NY Slip Op 08146,45 A.D.3d 927 |
| Parties | In the Matter of HANK ROSS, Petitioner, v. STATE BOARD FOR PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL CONDUCT, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Petitioner, an orthopedic surgeon, was charged by respondent in an original and amended statement of charges with 26 specifications of misconduct in violation of various subdivisions of Education Law § 6530. Specifically, petitioner was charged with fraudulent practice, willfully filing false reports, violating Public Health Law § 2805-k and engaging in conduct evidencing moral unfitness to practice medicine. The charges stemmed from information that petitioner provided on, among other documents, applications for privileges at certain hospitals. After hearing testimony from the relevant witnesses and reviewing the documentary evidence, a three-member Hearing Committee sustained all of the charges except those pertaining to moral unfitness and, as to penalty, suspended petitioner's license for one year, imposed a two-year period of probation, required petitioner to complete 20 hours of continuing medical education and directed that, during the probationary period, any renewal, appointment or insurance applications be submitted to the Director of the Office of Professional Medical Conduct.
Petitioner and the Bureau of Professional Medical Conduct each sought review of the Hearing Committee's decision by the Administrative Review Board for Professional Medical Conduct (hereinafter ARB). Upon review, the ARB affirmed the Hearing Committee's findings and, further, sustained the charge of moral unfitness and modified the penalty by revoking petitioner's license to practice medicine. Petitioner thereafter commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking to annul the ARB's determination and unsuccessfully sought a stay of the ARB's order pending our review.
It is undisputed that petitioner submitted applications to various entities that contained inaccurate information regarding, most significantly, his disciplinary background. What the parties now dispute is the net effect of those inaccuracies, with petitioner contending that these inadvertent and inconsequential errors were innocently committed by his mother, who filled out the original applications that formed the template for the ones that followed, and thereafter were perpetuated by his office manager, and the Bureau arguing that petitioner's repeated submission of numerous applications over a 15-year period— even after some of the more glaring inaccuracies were called to his attention—demonstrates a pattern of fraudulent and intentional misconduct. To resolve this dispute, we must consider the nature of the misinformation provided.
In this regard, the record reflects, among other things, that during his residency at the Hospital for Joint Diseases, petitioner was suspended from his duties as a fourth-year orthopedic resident for a period of five weeks (December 26, 1988 through February 1, 1989)—a fact that petitioner failed to disclose on his April 11, 1989 application for privileges at that hospital.*
Similarly, petitioner was served with a statement of charges in February 1988 stemming from an incident that occurred during his residency at Kings County Hospital Center in December 1986. Ultimately, a censure and reprimand was imposed, and this Court upheld that determination in November 1990. Nonetheless, petitioner failed to disclose such information and/or the resulting malpractice action on, among other things, his March 1989 application for privileges at Winthrop University Hospital, his April 1989 application for appointment at the Hospital for Joint Diseases or his May 1989...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Patin v. State Bd. for Prof'l Med. Conduct
...875 N.Y.S.2d 604 [2009], lv. denied 12 N.Y.3d 713, 883 N.Y.S.2d 178, 910 N.E.2d 1008 [2009]; Matter of Ross v. State Bd. for Professional Med. Conduct, 45 A.D.3d 927, 929, 845 N.Y.S.2d 162 [2007], lv. denied 10 N.Y.3d 701, 853 N.Y.S.2d 542, 883 N.E.2d 369 [2008] ). Furthermore, there is no ......
-
In the Matter of Maria–lucia Anghel v. Daines
...of Patin v. State Bd. for Professional Med. Conduct, 77 A.D.3d at 1214, 911 N.Y.S.2d 184; Matter of Ross v. State Bd. for Professional Med. Conduct, 45 A.D.3d 927, 929, 845 N.Y.S.2d 162 [2007], lv. denied 10 N.Y.3d 701, 853 N.Y.S.2d 542, 883 N.E.2d 369 [2008] ). Here, the testimony and the ......
-
Lakner v. N.Y. State Dept. of Health
...63 A.D.3d at 1316, 880 N.Y.S.2d 394 [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Matter of Ross v. State Bd. of Professional Med. Conduct, 45 A.D.3d 927, 929, 845 N.Y.S.2d 162 [2007], lv. denied 10 N.Y.3d 701, 853 N.Y.S.2d 542, 883 N.E.2d 369 [2008] ). ADJUDGED that the determinatio......
-
Kulik v. Zucker
...care was not implicated does not preclude revocation of [a] petitioner's license” (Matter of Ross v. State Bd. for Professional Med. Conduct, 45 A.D.3d 927, 930, 845 N.Y.S.2d 162 [2007], lv. denied 10 N.Y.3d 701, 853 N.Y.S.2d 542, 883 N.E.2d 369 [2008] ; see e.g. Matter of Saldanha v. DeBuo......