Pirouzian v. Superior Court (B266015, June 29, 2016) __ Cal.App.4th ___ [2016 WL 3623622], ordered published July 11, 2016.
After Dr. Amir Pirouzian took medical leave from his work as an pediatric ophthalmologist at a San Diego hospital due to a major depressive disorder, he claimed and received disability insurance benefits. He later accepted work at another hospital in Santa Clarita, but made false statements to his disability insurer about not working so he could continue receiving disability payments. He was eventually charged with felony insurance fraud, but pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor, which was later expunged after payment of restitution and probation. Years later, the Medical Board filed an accusation seeking to discipline Dr. Pirouzian. An ALJ determined that, although Dr. Pirouzian’s dishonesty did not harm any patients, his medical license should be revoked to protect the public. The Board adopted the ALJ’s decision, and the Superior Court denied a writ of administrative mandamus.
The Court of Appeal granted Dr. Pirouzian’s petition for writ of mandate, holding that the Board’s license revocation discipline was unduly harsh. The court explained that the Board’s disciplinary authority must be aimed at protecting the public, while also rehabilitating physicians if possible. Accordingly, while Dr. Pirouzian’s admitted dishonesty supported discipline, revoking his license was excessive and an abuse of discretion because it was not necessary to protect the public and because it did nothing to make Dr. Pirouzian a better physician. The court further explained that comments by the ALJ suggested the severe penalty was imposed to punish Dr. Pirouzian, due to the ALJ’s determination that the negotiated criminal plea was too lenient. This was improper because Board discipline cannot be imposed for punitive reasons.
Prepared by H. Thomas Watson and Peder K. Batalden, Horvitz & Levy, LLP
California Society for Healthcare Attorneys
1215 K Street, Suite 800
Sacramento, CA 95814
T 916.552.7605 | F 916.552.2607
