Skip to main content

Home/ healthcare regulation and scandals/ Group items tagged professional regulation

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Brett Snodgrass

Mishler v. State Bd. of Med. Examiners, 849 P. 2d 291 - Nev: Supreme Court 1993 - Googl... - 0 views

  • Dr. Alan J. Mishler
  • After a brief association with the neurosurgeon in Reno, Dr. Mishler, appalled at the neurosurgeon's standards of practice and his billing procedures, refused to work with him any longer.
  • Dr. Mishler
  • ...32 more annotations...
  • the Chairman of the Department of Neurosurgery at Washoe Medical Center (WMC)
  • brought his concerns to the attention of
  • Governor
  • an investigator
  • he Board
  • the Board obstructed Dr. Mishler's access to the records.
  • WMC did not renew Dr. Mishler's hospital privileges.
  • As a result, Dr. Mishler could not obtain work elsewhere
  • Board denied him access to the evidence (X-rays and radiographs)
  • none of the experts had an opportunity to review the X-rays
  • When WMC initiated the hostile chart review against Dr. Mishler
  • First, the Board's timing is suspect because it initiated proceedings against Dr. Mishler five years after he treated the patients in question, when the Board knew that WMC had a five-year retention policy
  • According to the uncontroverted evidence, Dr. Mishler's colleagues, in retaliation against him for his candor
  • the Board's failure to retain the records relevant to the license revocation proceedings against Dr. Mishler demonstrates a significant degree of discovery abuse
  • Board knew that Dr. Mishler had declared bankruptcy and could not afford counse
  • Fifth, the merits of the allegations against Dr. Mishler were inadequately addressed because neither he nor any of the witnesses had the opportunity to view the X-rays and diagnostic films.
  • similar abuses
  • Dr. Mishler's surgeries were successful, the symptoms vanished,
  • The sole purpose of the power to revoke a physician's license is to protect the public.
  • Boswell held that a doctor's harsh criticism of other doctors did not warrant revocation of his license
  • the discipline was unwarranted.
  • The Board's power was not exercised for the proper and commendable purpose of protecting 297*297 the public from incompetent and negligent physician
  • Instead, the Board wielded its power to ruin the career of an outspoken physician while simultaneously protecting a possibly negligent or incompetent practitioner who had questionable billing procedures.
  • only one
  • subsequently found to be unjustified,
  • Board
  • limit the evidence
  • obstruct Dr. Mishler's access to evidence,
  • violated the same policy
  • The Board knew that Dr. Mishler was so impoverished that he had declared bankruptcy, and that he could ill afford to hire counse
  • In short, we conclude that the Board's actions and the proceedings against Dr. Mishler constituted a disturbing abuse of its power
  • reverse the disciplinary order of the Board in its entirety and dismiss all proceedings against Dr. Mishler with prejudice
  •  
    too painful to read. torture of physicans for reporting bad doctors.
Brett Snodgrass

94 F.3d 652 - NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opi... - 0 views

  • United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
  • Mishler's original complaint alleged the malicious deprivation of his constitutionally-protected property right to obtain official verification of the existence of his license
  • licensing tribunal must be impartial and cannot act on the basis of personal bias.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • Each party to bear its own costs. Both parties' requests for attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 are denied.
  •  
    It took 10 years of litigation to address the corruption and dishonesty of the state medical board. The state medical board members used the state's authority to pursue strictly personal agendas and they maliciously deprived Alan J. Mishler, MD, the good neurosurgeon of his constitutional rights. 
Brett Snodgrass

Can You Rely on Your State's Medical Board? - Consumer Reports - 0 views

  • Can You Rely on Your State's Medical Board?
  • Where Medical Boards Fall Short
  • buried deep on the boards' websites or unavailable entirely online. (
  •  
    Concern about doctors on probation practicing. Parenthetically, Halstead, one of the best surgeons in American history was a habitual cocaine (stimulant) and then morhpine (depressant) user. 
Brett Snodgrass

Is your doctor on probation? - 0 views

  • s your doctor on probation?
  • Thousands of doctors are being disciplined by state medical boards for serious wrongdoing. But finding out who those doctors are can be difficult
  • The takeaway - doctors on the state medical board engage in conduct far more unethical than many of the physicians they discipline... Harming patients is okay, if they do it. However, reporting patient harm and unsafe patient care is unethical - at least according to the Missouri medical board. 
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • Consumer Reports' investigation shows how hard it can be to find out whether your doctor has been cited for substandard medical care or other issues.
  • The North Carolina medical board staff are kind and courteous and occasionally would reply to me, but the executive director and the staff of the Missouri Board of Registration for the Healing Arts acts contemptuously towards others that ask them to not file blatant lies in court about months of unsafe breast cancer testing. 
  •  
    The takeaway is that doctors on the Missouri Board of Registration for the Healing Arts show partiality while claiming to protect the public. 
Brett Snodgrass

Dr Social - 02-1491 HA - MBRHA - Pharmacology Incompetence - 0 views

  •  
    Accurate medical knowledge is a key to safe and effective patient care. Comments are made on Case 02-1491 HA, and then the full case is presented.
Brett Snodgrass

My Hidden VA List - NEJM - 0 views

  • My Hidden VA List
  • scandal would do more to separate issues of access to care from problems with the quality of care.
  •  
    Cancer Scandals have been and will likely continue to be. The VA Scandal is no exception to UMKC or NSABP cancer scandals nor any different than the South Korea stem cell scandals.
Brett Snodgrass

Dr Social - Mishler v Arizona Medical Board 3919 - 0 views

  • t Dr. Mishler, and that complaint was subsequently found to be unjustified, the Board purposely scrutinized Dr. Mishler's charts to find evidence with which to discipline Dr. Mishler.
  • Board used its own rules of confidentiality as an excuse to obstruct Dr. Mishler's access to evidence, it violated the same policy with respect to Dr. Mishler's confidential reports.
  •  
    In 1993 Dr. Mishler, a neurosurgeon was forced to go to court against the Arizona Board of Medical Examiners secondary to their unscrupulous and unethical conduct. The Arizona Medical Board obstructed peer
Brett Snodgrass

Mishler v. State Bd. of Med. Examiners, 849 P. 2d 291 - Nev: Supreme Court 1993 - 0 views

  • When we look beyond the label of the discipline given to Dr. Mishler to the true nature of the facts, we conclude that the discipline was unwarranted. The Board's power was not exercised for the proper and commendable purpose of protecting 297*297 the public from incompetent and negligent physicians. Instead, the Board wielded its power to ruin the career of an outspoken physician while simultaneously protecting a possibly negligent or incompetent practitioner who had questionable billing procedures.
  • In short, we conclude that the Board's actions and the proceedings against Dr. Mishler constituted a disturbing abuse of its power.
  • Therefore, we reverse the disciplinary order of the Board in its entirety and dismiss all proceedings against Dr. Mishler with prejudice.
  •  
    In 1993, the Arizona Supreme Court overturned all the of the AZ Medical Board's claims v. Dr. Mishler with prejudice. The Board's actions against Dr. Mishler constituted a disturbing abuse of its power.
Brett Snodgrass

Mathews v. Lancaster General Hosp., 87 F. 3d 624 - Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit 1996 -... - 0 views

  • Dr. Robert Mathews
  • He practices as a corporate partner with anothe
  • George Kent.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Dr. Kent was performing spinal surgery at Lancaster General. Dr. Mathews was listed as a co-surgeon for the operation. During the procedure, a high speed drill slipped and tore the patient's esophagus.
  • 27 of the 208
  • Mr. Robert Katana, President and CEO of Columbia Hospital, discovered the application did not contain a reappointment reference from Lancaster Genera
  • unity from 632*632 monetary damages under § 11111(a) of the Health Care Quality Improvement Act. The district court also granted summary judgmen
  •  
    Interesting and complex case. Surgical privileges at hospitals vary markedly from most other physician privileges
« First ‹ Previous 41 - 51 of 51
Showing 20 items per page