2014 Ohio 225
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Dr. Margy Temponeras (appellant) had her DEA registration immediately suspended by the DEA via a May 17, 2011 show cause order that found widespread improper prescribing and linked prescriptions to patient overdoses.
- The State Medical Board of Ohio notified Dr. Temponeras that it would act under R.C. 4731.22(B)(24) because the DEA suspension triggered Board authority to discipline a medical license.
- At the Board hearing, Dr. Temponeras stipulated to admissibility of the DEA show cause order but invoked her Fifth Amendment right and did not testify; the Board admitted the show cause order into evidence and heard other defense witnesses.
- The Board hearing examiner recommended, and the Board issued, an order indefinitely suspending Dr. Temponeras’ Ohio medical license on January 11, 2012, with specified conditions for reinstatement.
- Dr. Temponeras appealed to the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas arguing the Board’s action lacked corroborative testimony or documentary evidence; the trial court affirmed, finding reliable, probative, and substantial evidence supported the Board’s action.
- On appeal to the Tenth District, the court reviewed whether the common pleas court abused its discretion and ultimately affirmed the trial court’s judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Board needed evidence beyond DEA show cause order to suspend medical license under R.C. 4731.22(B)(24) | Temponeras: Board erred by relying on uncorroborated "paper allegations"; needed testimony or corroborative documentary evidence | Board: Statute requires only evidence that DEA suspended or terminated registration; show cause order sufficed and Temponeras stipulated to its admissibility | Held: The DEA suspension (as evidenced by the show cause order) constituted reliable, probative, substantial evidence and satisfied R.C. 4731.22(B)(24). |
| Whether Board proceedings may be used to collaterally attack DEA suspension | Temponeras: Implied attack on DEA findings; Board should present independent proof | Board: Board proceedings are not a collateral forum to relitigate DEA decision; statutory trigger is DEA action itself | Held: Proceedings cannot be used to collaterally attack the DEA decision; Board lawfully acted on DEA suspension. |
| Standard of review by common pleas court and appellate court | Temponeras: Argued trial court misapplied review standards (implicit) | Board: Trial court properly applied "reliable, probative, substantial" evidence standard and deferential review rules | Held: Trial court applied correct standards; appellate court finds no abuse of discretion in affirmance. |
| Admissibility and effect of Temponeras’ invocation of Fifth Amendment at Board hearing | Temponeras: Invocation limited Board’s ability to rely on testimonial evidence against her (implicit) | Board: Temponeras’ invocation does not prevent Board from relying on admissible documentary evidence she stipulated to | Held: Temponeras’ Fifth Amendment invocation does not negate admissibility or weight of the stipulated DEA order; Board properly relied on it. |
Key Cases Cited
- Univ. of Cincinnati v. Conrad, 63 Ohio St.2d 108 (1980) (administrative-review standard and scope)
- Our Place, Inc. v. Ohio Liquor Control Comm., 63 Ohio St.3d 570 (1992) (defines "reliable, probative, and substantial" evidence)
- Lies v. Veterinary Med. Bd., 2 Ohio App.3d 204 (1981) (describes hybrid review and need to appraise credibility and weight of evidence)
- Andrews v. Bd. of Liquor Control, 164 Ohio St. 275 (1955) (appraisal-of-evidence standard for administrative review)
- Pons v. Ohio State Med. Bd., 66 Ohio St.3d 619 (1993) (appellate review limited to abuse-of-discretion; defer to Board on technical matters)
- Ohio Historical Soc. v. State Emp. Relations Bd., 66 Ohio St.3d 466 (1993) (common pleas court reviews legal questions de novo)