Iowa District Court Decision holds the physician missed the filing deadline for reviewing the Iowa Board of Medicine’s final decision regarding his not meeting the standard of practice that restricted his general surgery practice. It appears a motion to reconsider the Board's decision was filed twice and unless the decision is changed, the deadline for judicial review runs from the denial or presumed denial with the initial motion to reconsider.
The phyciaian was ordered to complete a comprehensive clinic competency evaluation. According to the press release he was reprimanded and ordered to pay a $5,000 civil penalty and to complete a medical record keeping course. That appears to have been on October 22, 2010 with the original charges being filed on January 17, 2008. On April 19, 2011 the Board approved the doctor’s plan and return to practice of general surgery subject to the ongoing monitoring plan and Board supervision. On November 16, 2012 the Board terminated the order, returning the doctor to full privileges, free and clear of restrictions.
The doctor filed a petition for judicial review after the second motion to reconsider, but it was found to be untimely and the Petition dismissed.
Interesting the CPEP evaluation in Denver, Colorado was replaced with an alternative location in San Diego, California.
Procedurally there is a different appeal deadline that must be filed when a party, in this instance a doctor, files a Petition asking the Board to reconsider its decision, loses and then seeks to have the Iowa District Court review the decision. See Iowa Code sections 17A.16(2) and 17A.19(3).
It’s not always clear what deadlines apply at and stage of the proceedings. In this instance the Petition for Judicial Review was found to be untimely; and in the end I’m not sure it matters.
“Even so, Iowa courts construe rule 1.904(2) to prevent duplicative or successive motions from having any legal effect unless substantive changes were made to past findings or conclusions based on previous rule 1.904(2) motions. See Okland, 699 N.W.2d at 265–66; Boughton, 576 N.W.2d at 96; Doland v. Boone Co., 376 N.W.2d 870, 875–76 (Iowa 1985).”
Filing successive motions is essentially a crap shoot with winning the only way around filing deadline. The District Court decisions is well-written and a clear statement of the law. It should assist lawyers in future cases.
Iowa Decision on the State Site