|
New York's Disciplined Vets, 2005
The following list of veterinarians disciplined by the New York State Board of Regents in the year 2005 was provided by the Board in response to a request from the Toonces Project.
PLEASE NOTE: This is not a complete list of disciplined vets in New York. If your vet's name does not appear on this list, it does not mean that she or he does not have a disciplinary record with the State of New York, Education Department, Division of Professional Licensing, Public Information Unit, dplsdsu@mail.nysed.gov or contact the Toonces Project at help@thetooncesproject.com to request assistance with filing said request.
Also, be aware that the absence of a record with the state is no guarantee of quality or competent care. Remember that the majority of complaints filed by pet owners are dismissed by Veterinary Boards. Our review of many dismissed complaints leads us to believe that in many cases, even complaints that are dismissed present information that would cause any conscientious pet owner to be concerned about the care provided by the vet. However, unfortunately, with the exception of a few states, complaints themselves are not available as public record.
Unless otherwise specified, the individuals below are veterinarians. If the individual is a veterinary technician, that is so noted.
Basabe, Carlos. Actions: Consent Order. Terms: License Suspended, 1 year (suspension stayed); probation, 1 year; Fine $1,000. Available Information: "Respondent is charged with practicing the profession of veterinary medicine with gross negligence, within the purview and meaning of New York Education Law section 6509(2), in that: On or about February 19, 2003, while employed as a veterinarian at East Village Green Animal Hospital, Levittown, New York, Respondent performed a spay on a cat but failed to obtain a full health history on said cat, failed to perform a full physical, and failed to perform pre-surgical tests prior to the surgery being performed."
Broderick, Geoffrey R. Actions: Consent Order. Terms: License Suspended 3 years (suspension stayed); probation, 3 years; Fine, $10,000. Available Information: Respondent is charged with committing professional misconduct, within the purview and meaning of New York Education Law section 6509(9), in specific reference to 8 NYCRR 29.6(a)(3), in that:
A. On all the dates below, Responded was practising veterinary medicine in his office located in Huntington, New York, and on January 17, 198, rendered treatment to animal patient "[name omitted]", but failed to record his physical findings, observations, diagnosis and prescribed treatments.
B. On or about January 11 2000, Respondent rendered treatment to animal patient "[name omitted]" but failed to chart the findings of his daily physical examinations, hydration assessments and a treatment plan.
C. On or about July 3, 4, and 5 2000, Respondent rendered treatment to animal patient "[name omitted]" but failed to record any physical examination upon admission, or for each day of treatment, monitoring of weight, chest auscultation, or medications administered.
D. On or about October 14, 2000, Respondent rendered treatment to animal patient "[name omitted]" but failed to record the condition of the animal patient's teeth, gingival, ears, the need for antibiotics or the fact that Respondent irrigated its ears.
E. On or about June 4, 2001, Respondent rendered treatment to animal patient ["name omitted]" but failed to record his findings, observations, diagnosis and prescribed treatment.
F. On or about August 20, 2001, Respondent rendered treatment to animal patient ["name omitted]" but failed to record his physical findings upon ["name omitted"] admission and for each day of treatment, monitoring of weight, chest auscultation or mediations administered and also failed to label the animal patient's radiographs."
Note: Document includes the following statement made by Broderick: "I admit guilt to the aforesaid specification of professional misconduct, charging me with comitting professional misconduct (failing to maintain adequate records of visits, diagnoses and prescribed treatments for a period of at least three years)."
Dedrick, Douglas George. Actions: Consent Order. Terms: Partial Suspension (in area of spay and neuter only) until Respondent submits and successfully completes a plan of continuating education consisting of coursework in soft tissue surgery including spaying and neutering. Probation, 2 years; Fine, $1,500. Available Information: "Respondent is charged with practicing the profession of veterinary medicine with negligence on more than one occasion, within the purview and meaning of New York Education Law section 6509(2), in that:
On or about October 4, 2000, while working as a veterinarian in Cattaraugus County, New York, Respondent performed an incomplete spaying of a dog named "[name omitted]" and thte dog subsequently went into estrus. On or about May 8, 2002, while working as a veterinarian in Erie County, New York, Respondent Performed an incomplete spaying of a cat named "[name omitted]" and the cat subsequently went into estrus."
Note: Document includes the following statement made by Dedrick: "I do not contest the aforesaid specification of professional misconduct, charging me with practicing the profession of veterinary medicine with negligence on more than one occasion (performing an incomplete spaying of a dog and an incomplete spaying of a cat)."
Dinetz, Bruno Moi. Actions: Consent Order. Terms: Suspension, 2 years (stayed); Probation, 2 years; Fine, $5,000. Available Information:
"Respondent is charged with practicing the profession of veterinary medicine with gross negligence, within the purview and meaning of New York Education Law section 6509(2), in that:
In June 2002, Respondent failed to properly diagnose a cat for hyperthyroidism thereby failing to render appropriate treatment to the cat."
Respondent is charged with commiting unprofessional conduct, within the purview and meaning of New York Education Law section 6509(9), in specific violation of 8 NYCRR 29.6(a) (3), in that:
Respondent examined the aforementioned cat on June 21, 2002 and on November 26, 2002 and failed to record the findings from the examinations and the dosages of medications given."
Note: Document includes the following statement made by Dinetz: "I do not contest the aforesaid specifications of professional misconduct, charging me with gross negligence and unprofessional conduct (failure to recognize and thereby treat a cat for hyperthyroidism and failure to maintain adequate records."
Fabrizio, Sara Marie (Veterinary Technician). Actions: Consent Order. Terms: Suspension, 1 year (stayed); Probation, 1 year; Fine, $500. Available Information:
"Respondent is charged with practicing as a veterinary technician with gross negligence, within the purview and meaning of New York Education Law section 6509(2), in that:
On or about April 29, 2004 Respondent, while employed as a veterinary technician at Westvale Veterinary Hospital, Syracuse, New York, administered .85 ml (8.5 mg) butorphanol to a feline patient rather than butorphanol .08 ml (.85 mg) as ordered by the veterinarian.
Note: Document includes the following statement made by Fabrizio: "I admit guilt to the aforesaid specification of professional misconduct, charging me with practicing the profession with gross negligence on one occastion (medication error)."
Greenberg, Miles Adrian. Actions: Consent Order. Terms: Suspension, 2 years (stayed); Probation, 2 years; Fine, $1,000. Available Information:
"Respondent is charged with practicing the profession of veterinary medicine with gross negligence on a particular occasion, within the purview and meaning of New York Education Law section 6509(2), in that:
(a) Respondent had been the veterinarian for the dog belonging to "[name omitted"] since the dog's birth in 1998 and in that year, Respondent correctly diagnosed that the dog had a heart murmur;
(b) On September 23, 2004, DV brought the dog into Respondent's professional office for the practice of veterinary medicine in White Plains, New York and indicated to him that the dog was sneezing, coughing and not eating or drinking;
(c) Respondent diagnosed that the dog had "kennel cough" and prescribed antibiotics when, in light of the dog's cardiac history, he should have instituted cardiac therapy or offered a referral to an internal medicine specialist instead of treating the cough exclusively as an infection."
Note: Document includes the following statement made by Greenberg: "I admit guilt to the aforesaid specification of professional misconduct, charging me with practicing the profession of veterinary medicine with gross negligence on a particular occasion (while treating a dog, who had a previous cardiac history, for a cough, I should have commenced cardiac therapy or offered a referral to an internal medicine specialist instead of treating the cough exclusively as an infection)."
Maltese, Rita (Veterinary Technician). Actions: Consent Order. Terms: Suspension, 2 years (stayed); Probation, 2 years; Fine, $500. Available Information:
"Respondent is charged with having been convited of commiting an act constituting a crime under New York State law, within the purview and meaning of New York Education Law section 6509(5)(a)(i), in that:
"On or about June 26, 2001 . . . Respondent was charged by Information with the crimes of: Driving While Intoxicated . . . Criminally Possessing a Hypodermic Needle . . . . Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance . . . "
Pernice, Salvatore. Actions: Consent Order. Terms: Suspension, 1 year (stayed); Probation, 1 year; Fine, $1,000. Available Information: "Respondent is charged with practising the profession of veteirnary medicine with gros negligence, within the purview and meaning of New York Education Law section 6509(2), in that:
On October 8, 2003 Respondent was presented with a 5 year old, 114-pound Rotweiler who was not eating, vomiting for two days and having bowel trouble. The dog was hospitalized with Respondent. The following day, Respondent conducted a blood analysis, which revealed a high blood sugar level (665), elevated kidney values and elevated electrolyte imbalances. Respondent failed to use an adequate level of NPH insulin to control the dog's high sugar level."
|
