CASE ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Bottom Line: This case involved a physician who was initially found guilty and penalized by a hearing committee for professional misconduct based on a 2008 federal criminal conviction for internet prescription drug distribution. However, the Administrative Review Board completely overturned the hearing committee’s decision and vacated all penalties, determining that the physician had already been adequately disciplined through prior administrative action and federal court sentencing for the same underlying conduct. This represents a successful appeal where the physician ultimately faced no New York disciplinary action.
DETAILED CASE ANALYSIS
Effective Date: January 4, 2012
Type of Doctor: Medical Doctor (M.D.) licensed to practice medicine in New York State (License #163619, issued August 5, 1985)
Disposition Type: Administrative Review Board determination overturning hearing committee decision and vacating all penalties
How many total charges? 1 specification of professional misconduct
What specifications of charges were alleged? Professional misconduct under New York Education Law §6530(9)(a)(ii) for being convicted of committing an act constituting a crime under federal law, specifically Distribution of Misbranded Prescription drugs in violation of Title 21 U.S.C. § 353 (b)(1)
How many patients were involved in each charge? The document does not specify exact patient numbers, but the physician admitted to writing 50-60 internet prescriptions per day during 2002 and 2003, suggesting hundreds or thousands of patients were involved over this period
Which charges was the licensee guilty of (either via hearing or negotiated consent)?
-
- Initial Hearing Committee: Found the physician guilty of the specification (3-0 vote)
- Final Administrative Review Board Decision: Overturned the committee’s determination and vacated the penalty (5-0 vote)
Which charges was the licensee not guilty of? There was only one charge. While initially found guilty by the hearing committee, the Administrative Review Board ultimately vacated all penalties.
Outcome/Penalties (specific to this case):
-
- Initial Hearing Committee Penalties (September 21, 2011):
- $10,000 fine (payable within 90 days)
- 5-year license suspension (stayed in whole)
- 5 years probation with specific terms
- Specification of professional misconduct sustained
- Final Administrative Review Board Decision (December 28, 2011):
- All penalties completely vacated
- No disciplinary action imposed
- Rationale for ARB Reversal: The Board found that the physician had already been disciplined in 2005 with an administrative warning for the same internet prescribing conduct from 2002, and that the federal court had already imposed appropriate punishment (three years probation, $25 special assessment, 100 hours community service, and one year home confinement). The ARB concluded that “any additional sanction by BPMC unnecessary.”
- Underlying Federal Sentence: Three years probation, special assessment of $25.00, 100 hours of community service, and home confinement for 365 days
- Financial Context: The physician earned approximately $47,000 total from his internet prescribing operation, earning about $3,600 per month for several years
- Initial Hearing Committee Penalties (September 21, 2011):
The physician appeared at the hearing with counsel and expressed that what he had done was “absolutely wrong” and that he “could not take it back,” showing remorse for his actions.