Jones v. State, Dept. of Health, 242 P.3d 825

Board summary-suspended Jones without notice or hearing for unsatisfactory inspections; four inspections from Dec 1998 to Aug 1999 with fluctuating scores (79, 96, 48/56) and escalating concerns over record-keeping and DEA compliance.
December 1998 and February 1999 inspections cited broad record-keeping violations; later July/August 1999 inspections intensified with specific deficiencies (drug records, NDC accuracy, inadequate audit trails, nonchild-resistant containers).
Ex parte summary suspension issued Aug 17, 1999 for “immediate danger” to public health; notice gave Jones right to a prompt hearing or a regularly scheduled hearing; Jones opted to apply for a motion to modify and stay and later settled with an agreed order.
Jones signed stipulations acknowledging sufficiency of evidence and agreed to a five-year pharmacist license suspension and revocation of the pharmacy license; Board entered the agreed order Feb 4, 2000.
Jones filed 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state tort claims against Board and inspectors; Court of Appeals held no due process violation and exhaustion bar; Washington Supreme Court reversed and held issues for trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether inspectors Wene and Jeppesen are entitled to qualified immunity.	Jones asserts fabrication of an emergency; material facts show arbitrary scoring and creation of emergency.	Board inspectors acted within qualified immunity; no clearly established violation given emergency context.	Partially yes: genuine issue of material fact on fabrication; not clearly entitled to immunity.
Whether there exists a genuine issue of material fact that the emergency was fabricated.	Record shows abrupt, unexplained drop in scores and aggressive conduct.	No fabrication; evidence supports emergency; inconsistencies are insufficient.	There is a genuine issue of material fact.
Whether exhaustion doctrine bars Jones' state tort claims because he waived hearings.	Waiver of expedited hearing should not bar later claims; final agency action occurred.	Exhaustion satisfied; waiver does not negate final agency determination; claims barred.	Exhaustion not fatal under the circumstances; also final agency action existing.
Whether Jones exhausted administrative remedies for §1983 claims.	Administrative process culminated in an agreed order; remedies exhausted.	Exhaustion satisfied; final agency action; waiver of prompt hearing did not preclude exhaustion.	Jones exhausted available administrative remedies.

Pearson v. Callahan, 129 S. Ct. 808 (2009) (qualified immunity questions can be decided at summary judgment)
Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) (objective reasonableness standard for qualified immunity)
Siegert v. Gilley, 500 U.S. 226 (1991) (two-part inquiry for §1983 claim under qualified immunity)
Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985) (connection and reasonableness of conduct in due process claims)
Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 (1987) (clearly established law needed to defeat entitlement to immunity)