hearing which he lost and then we feel that to judge pro and that was denied and then we're here today we have several issues we'd like to bring to you first with respect before they're used for a determination then we went to a three three member board of doctors but there's a psychiatry is there all this is something they were they were people that were designed for those specialties and i saw something in some kind of earlier proceeding not involving these particular charges to something earlier regarding his behavior is that incorrect there was a reference to an a wall and well there's two things that he was when he after the first year there was  probationary period specifically was was there some earlier kind of review of him not really his farce i mean there were things that were raised in the e mails back and forth but there was never any kind of review of the seven instances that we're here about and for example he was never question really is they decide if somebody administration as of this guy just an incompetent doctor for whatever reason doesn't get along with staff and get on with people he's not treating his patients properly and slowly commen only happy at you have to behave with honesty with the community and with a better and honestly courtesy compassion and they say he's the last thing the last word in compassion he so bad that he's no compassion as they say and suggest you know he can't be rude he can't be indifferent to his patients separate now that's the closest thing we have in terms of written rules th talk about a physician just doesn't know how to treat patients properly or other staff members and that's what we're going to try to get rid of him what's wrong with actually a question you know you just haven't answered the question is what's wrong with the fire them your fundamental claim as i understand it and correct me if i'm wrong is that they proceeded too quickly to the decision of discharge and didn't explore any peer review committees to work on progressive disciplines or any such or not that i'm aware of i mean i think it's common sense but but we didn't put it in the record that says you know you failed to meet the staff of the staff or whatever but i think you know we are dealing with allegations of inadequate medical treatment your honor why and why none of that here are the log does not require that there will be a prerequisite here's a review or progress in disciplinary action so the way the veterans department is comparable with the way it's hospitals are run if there's any complaints about a position that relates to the way they treat patients you just throw it into the administrative procedure you never referred to peer review i would not say the medication got to the wrong patient that's a very serious allegation why wasn't that peer reviewed i wouldn't be able to answer that your honor i don't know exactly what the station code or what elements came into the discretionary decision of the director of let me finish my question then i would may i finish my question yes and then you can answer it all you wish is it correct that by virtue of their specialty the people that sat on these boards would be medically incompetent to but that's the difficulty because i understand the standard of review in these cases and we are deferential but if what you're basically what you're saying is that it's a standard let's review that the i mean if that's i hope that's not your position no you're on but it's difficult for me to understand what then if you're just taking a charge of malpractise what's the standard that guides this board and determining whether a legal malpractise medical malpractise is sufficient  consulate charge we're talking about his poor clinical judgment is the notion that poor clinical judgment is equivalent to malpractise it strikes me that professionals can have poor judgment and not cross the malpractise line and what they're saying  showed poor clinical judgment in the way you responded to the emergency room and in the fact that once a person was admitted and you didn't even go to personally evaluate his status once he was admitted now he has reasons for that i understand bad you know there's some lawyers out there who never commit malpractise their judgment is rotten i just said if i buy professional licenses being judged on that standard i would be very concerned and i think that's our problem where we're taking a more focused very great concepts and i think there has to be some type of standards i'm not sure how we get there but i just i think there's this is just too big to to threaten somebody whose profession the way this is done ok thank you very much  your argument thank both counsel for their argument the case just argued will be submitted her decision