Jack Wayne Butler v. Tennessee Board of Nursing
M2016-00113-COA-R3-CV
| Tenn. Ct. App. | Oct 25, 2016Background
- Jack Wayne Butler applied (Dec 2013) for initial Tennessee RN licensure and disclosed a prior Oklahoma misdemeanor plea of nolo contendere (outraging public decency).
- The Board's Application Review Committee (ARC) requested certified records; Butler submitted a lengthy pro se letter explaining his plea with extraordinary factual allegations (extortion, false accusations, assaults).
- ARC recommended denial (statutory grounds: "guilty of a crime" and "fraud or deceit"); Butler sought to withdraw his application and later obtained counsel and an Oklahoma expungement (Dec 4, 2014).
- The Board denied the application (Dec 4, 2014), relying on both grounds; Butler sought judicial review by common-law writ of certiorari in chancery court.
- The chancery court held no contested-case hearing was required, ruled the Board could not rely on the expunged conviction to prove "guilty of a crime," but affirmed denial based on fraud/deceit due to Butler's letter and credibility issues.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed: no right to a contested case for an initial license here; expunged conviction could not support the "guilty of a crime" ground; material evidence supported fraud/deceit finding.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Butler was entitled to a UAPA contested-case hearing for denial of an initial nursing license | Butler: denial implicated liberty (reputation/national reporting) and due process; contested case required | Board: UAPA and nursing statutes do not mandate contested case for initial licenses; Butler received name-clearing process | Held: No contested case required; liberty interest (if any) satisfied by multiple opportunities to appear (name-clearing) |
| Whether the Board could rely on Butler's expunged Oklahoma conviction to deny licensure as "guilty of a crime" under Tenn. Code §63-7-115(a)(1)(B) | Butler: Board erred; conviction expunged, so cannot be used | Board: may consider admissions/records despite expunction; Miller dicta is wrong—Canipe permits considering expunged acts | Held: Expunged/ sealed conviction under Oklahoma law could not be used to prove a conviction; trial court correctly reversed denial on this ground |
| Whether the Board's finding of fraud or deceit (in procuring a license) was arbitrary or unsupported by material evidence | Butler: no proof of fraud; Board improperly relied on staff obtaining records that applicant's counsel did not | Board: Butler's letter and statements contradicted verifiable facts; credibility issues support fraud/deceit finding | Held: Affirmed — Board had material evidence (Butler's letter, inconsistent claims, inability to substantiate) to find deceit in procuring license |
| Whether chancery court should have reviewed de novo (vs. certiorari limited review) or granted broader relief | Butler: sought broader UAPA review/contested-case remedies | Board: certiorari review appropriate because no contested case; limited review applies | Held: Common-law writ of certiorari was proper; limited standard applied and upheld Board's deceit finding while reversing use of expunged conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Tennessee Bd. of Nursing, 256 S.W.3d 225 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007) (expunction may preclude reliance on prior conviction if evidence of expunction is presented)
- Canipe v. Memphis City Sch. Bd. of Educ., 27 S.W.3d 919 (Tenn. 2000) (expunged convictions may be considered as evidence of underlying misconduct in disciplinary proceedings where the charge is broader than proof of a conviction)
- Wright v. Tenn. Peace Officer Standards & Training Comm’n, 277 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008) (expunged plea cannot be treated as a conviction when statute requires legal status of conviction; distinguishing "conduct unbecoming" standards)
- Mid-South Indoor Horse Racing, Inc. v. Tenn. State Racing Comm’n, 798 S.W.2d 531 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1990) (UAPA contested-case procedures are not automatically triggered for denial of initial licenses absent statutory requirement)
- Ludwig v. Bd. of Trustees of Ferris State Univ., 123 F.3d 404 (6th Cir. 1997) (elements for liberty interest/name-clearing claim in employment/licensure contexts)