Source: https://podiatry.az.gov/board-actions?page=3
Timestamp: 2020-07-07 19:21:24
Document Index: 734211111

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 32', '§ 32', '§32', '§32', '§ 32', '§ 32', '§ 32', '§ 32', '§ 32', '§ 32', '§ 32', '§ 32', '§ 32', '§ 32', '§ 32', '§ 32', '§ 32', '§32']

Brad Hayman POD-000216
Dr. Hayman's progress notes do not include any pre-operative x-rays taken, no laboratory report, pathology report, or blood work-up prior to surgery.
On or about April 1999, the Board received a complaint against Respondent from Medicare Payment Safeguard regarding quality of care and billing issues related to Respondent's patient. Respondent treated patient on 88 consecutive days from approximately June 1998 to October 1998. The treatments were such as to not be medically helpful to patient and showed a lack of professional judgement in wound care. Respondent billed Medicare and collected a fee in an amount that was clearly excessive for the treatments as referenced above.
Respondent engaged in conduct or a practice which was harmful or dangerous to the health of the patient. Respondent failed to maintain adequate records on the patient.
Respondent engaged in conduct which disqualifies him from the practice of podiatry with regard to the safety and welfare of the public
Second Amended Order of Suspension and Probation
Dr. Brad Hayman shall be subject to a period of non-disciplinary probation. Respondent shall be placed on probation for the term of one year, during which time respondent shall be subject to a chart audit by the Board of all patients having undergone an oteotomy procedure of any of the 1st through 5th metatarsals (to include bunionectomy osteotomies) while under respondent's care.
Brent Hill 0176
98A-001
Respondent's failure to accept responsibility for his violations; rather, he merely poses (via correspondence) that he didn't know the law that applies to his profession. The record establishes that, despite the Board's patience and efforts to provide Respondent an opportunity to rehabilitate his reputation and career, Respondent has ignored his professional obligations and refused to take responsibility for his actions, causing undue risks to the public.
96006,96014, 96017 & 96022
A.R.S. § 32-852(2): knowingly making a false or fraudulent statement, written or oral, in connection with the practice of podiatry; A.R.S. § 32-852(5): conduct that disqualifies him to practice podiatry with regard to the safety and welfare of the public; A.R.S. §32-852(6): unprofessional conduct as defined in Section 32-854.01, as further identified as follows: A.R.S. §32-852(9): failing to obtain informed consent from a patient prior to the performance of any surgical procedure on the patient; A.R.S. § 32-854.01( 11): failing or refusing to maintain adequate records on a patient; A.R.S. § 32-854.01(16): malpractice or repeated malpractice; A.R.S. § 32-854.01(18): violation of any federal or state laws or rules and regulations of applicable to the practice of podiatry; A.R.S. § 32-854.01(20): any conduct of practice which is or might be harmful or dangerous to the health of the patient; A.R.S. § 32-854.01(22): violating or attempting tothe practice of podiatry; A.R.S. § 32-854.01(20): any conduct of practice which is or might be harmful or dangerous to the health of the patient; A.R.S. § 32-854.01(22): violating or attempting to violate, directly or indirectly, or assisting in or abetting the violation of or conspiring to violate any provision of this chapter; and A.R.S. § 32-854.01(23): charging or collecting a clearly excessive fee.
Violation of A.R.S. § 32-854.01(23) in that Dr. Hill charged and/or collected a clearly excessive fee. The conduct and circumstances described constitutes a violation of A.R.S. § 32-854.01(20) in that Dr. Hill engaged in conduct or a practice which was harmful or dangerous to the health of patient to wit: Failure to timely detect through cultures and additional diagnostic tests and/or treat probable underlying osteomyelitis to the bony structures of the patient's right hallux and tibial sesamoid.
Corina Hollander 0193
DEA discovered evidence indicating that Respondent and at least one member of her office staff were engaging in prescription fraud by filling prescriptions for Oxycodone under other people's names and diverting those prescriptions for their personal use.
Robert Fridrich POD-000203
Conduct or practice that is or might be harmful or dangerous to the health of a patient and failing to maintain adequate records.
Gary Friedlander POD-000196
00-02; 01A-001-POD
Suspension for 60 days followed by a 365-day probation for, scheduling an emergency surgery for incision and debridement of a septic abscess on the patient's left foot. During the surgical procedure, Licensee amputated the left foot, which was not allowable under the Board's statutes. Based upon the uncontroverted evidence, the Board finds that the conduct and circumstances constitutes a violation of A.R.S. § 32-854.01(18) (operating outside the scope of permissible practices as that practice is limited by A.R.S. § 32-801(A)(9) and (10)).
Richard Garrard 0227
Respondent pled guilty to a one count Information in the United States District court, District of Arizona, to Theft of Govemment Money, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 641, a Class A Misdemeanor offense. Respondent knowingly billed the Medicare Program wrongfully for services that were not eligible for reimbursement.
Alan Gaveck 0424
Failure to obtain consent from the patient prior to a surgical procedure and failed to recommend that the patient obtain a vascular consultation or second opinion.
Gaveck_06-04.pdf
Thomas Glow 0087
Disciplinary action pursuant to A.R.S. §§ 32-854.01(12),(13) and (15).
Glow_95-06.pdf
Gary Docks 0353
95001 & 95014
Dr. Docks engaged in conduct or a practice which was harmful or dangerous to the health of patient, failing to obtain a lab report and failing to obtain a culture and sensitivity report on the patient's open, infected, and ulcerated 5th toe. The conduct and circumstances constitute a violation of A.R.S. §32-854.01(9). Dr. Docks failed to obtain informed consent from patient prior to performing additional tenotomy procedures at the time of surgery. The conduct and circumstances constitute a violation of A.R.S. 132-854.01(11). Dr. Docks failed or refused to maintain adequate records on patient, Records do not include an operative report, and x-rays taken on April 27, 1993 were of poor quality.