Walker v. Physical Therapy Bd. of California, D071984

Background

Grace Lorraine Walker, a licensed California physical therapist since 1978, struck two parked cars on January 1, 2011 while intoxicated, left the scene, later had BAC readings of .19–.20, and pled guilty to misdemeanor hit-and-run in June 2012 (DUI counts dismissed).
The Physical Therapy Board of California filed an accusation alleging (1) conviction of a crime substantially related to practice, (2) use of alcohol in a dangerous manner (violation of Medical Practice Act §2239), and related regulatory violations.
An administrative hearing produced findings that Walker was likely intoxicated when she hit the cars, that her testimony about drinking after the collision was not credible, and that she used alcohol in a manner dangerous to herself and others.
The Board revoked Walker’s license but stayed revocation and placed her on probation with alcohol-evaluation and monitoring requirements; Walker sought writ of administrative mandamus in superior court.
The superior court held the hit-and-run misdemeanor was not sufficiently related to fitness to practice to support discipline but sustained discipline under former Bus. & Prof. Code §2660 (incorporating Medical Practice Act §2239) for dangerous use of alcohol. Walker appealed.
The Court of Appeal affirmed, concluding §2239 and §2660 authorize discipline based on a single dangerous use of alcohol without a separate case-specific nexus finding.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a single isolated incident of alcohol use in a dangerous manner can support discipline of a physical therapist absent a separate factual nexus showing impact on practice	Walker: §2239 requires more than a single incident; statute contemplates habitual use or a separate nexus between the conduct and fitness to practice	Board: Legislature via §2239 (Medical Practice Act) and §2660 deemed dangerous alcohol use per se substantially related to fitness to practice; no separate nexus finding required	Held: A single instance of alcohol use in a dangerous manner may support discipline; the Legislature’s incorporation of §2239 into §2660 supplies the nexus, so no separate case-specific nexus finding is required
Whether the Board abused discretion given the time lag between incident and discipline	Walker: Four-year delay and lack of subsequent incidents undercut finding of impaired fitness	Board: Delay encompassed plea, administrative process; Board conditioned probation to relieve alcohol-related requirements if evaluation shows no abuse	Held: Delay was not shown unreasonable; Board’s probation conditions addressed interim conduct, court did not err
Whether the hit-and-run misdemeanor conviction alone supported discipline as conduct substantially related to practice	Walker: Hit-and-run not substantially related to physical therapy practice	Board: Conviction coupled with intoxication supports discipline under §2660	Held: Superior court found hit-and-run conviction alone was not sufficiently related; however discipline upheld on §2239 grounds
Whether Walker waived statutory/nexus argument by not raising it earlier	Board: Argument waived for failing to raise at hearing	Walker: She raised the substance before Board and in writ petition	Held: No waiver; appellate court considered the statutory interpretation question on the merits

Key Cases Cited

Watson v. Superior Court, 176 Cal.App.4th 1407 (construing §2239 as statutorily defining dangerous alcohol use as conduct substantially related to fitness to practice)
Griffiths v. Superior Court, 96 Cal.App.4th 757 (discussing §2239 and constitutionally sufficient nexus analysis)
Sulla v. Board of Registered Nursing, 205 Cal.App.4th 1195 (upholding discipline on a single DUI incident under analogous statute)
Cartwright v. Board of Chiropractic Examiners, 16 Cal.3d 762 (due process requirement that discipline have nexus to fitness to practice)