Fraud by Licensed Paramedic & Criminal Conduct Can Result in Removal of License 

Failure in Obligation to Self-Report Needs to be Proved

Failure in Obligation to Self-Report Needs to be Proved

Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fraud-licensed-paramedic-criminal-conduct-can-result-barry and https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4050 posts.

Kevin A. Imhof (“Imhof”) appealed from the decision of the Board of Medical Licensure and Discipline (hereinafter the “Board”) finding that he engaged in unprofessional conduct. A final order of the Board (hereinafter the “Order”) found that Imhof, a Board-licensed paramedic, engaged in conduct constituting crimes substantially related to the practice of medicine; engaged in dishonorable, unethical, or other conduct likely to deceive, defraud, or harm the public; and wilfully failed to report certain conduct in a timely fashion. In Kevin Imhof v. Delaware Board Of Medical Licensure And Discipline, C. A. No. K21A-06-004 NEP, Superior Court of Delaware (January 26, 2022) a Delaware appellate court resolved some of the issues raised by the appeal.

The Board has promulgated a list of “dishonorable or unethical” conduct under Regulation 8. According to Regulation 8, “[t]he phrase ‘dishonorable or unethical conduct likely to deceive, defraud, or harm the public’ … shall include, but not be limited to . . . [a]ny . . . act tending to bring discredit upon the profession.” It is not difficult to perceive how the admitted wrongful conduct and actions would bring discredit to the profession.

The appellate court concluded that there was substantial evidence to support the finding by the Board that Imhof violated the statute by committing acts likely to “harm the public” and “discredit” the profession.

Without reversing the Board on the requirement to self-report, the court remanded the matter to the Board for further consideration of whether a wilful failure to report has been established and to consider whether the discipline imposed should be modified in light of any additional consideration of these matters by the Board.

The Court affirmed the Board’s finding that Imhof engaged in conduct constituting crimes substantially related to the practice of medicine in violation of statute and that he engaged in dishonorable, unethical, or other conduct likely to deceive, defraud, or harm the public. However, further inquiry by the Board is needed regarding whether Imhof wilfully failed to report certain conduct and whether, as a result of that inquiry, the discipline imposed should be modified.

ZALMA OPINION

The appellate court, dotting every “i” and crossing every “t” sent the case back to the Board to determine whether the failure to prove that Imhof intentionally failed to report his crimes to the Board, and whether that had any effect on the punishment. The criminal conduct should have been sufficient so, I expect, the Board will reconsider and then suspend the license.