ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

21A-2020090504-NUR · State Board of Nursing · 2021-03-04

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

IN THE MATTER OF REGISTERED NURSE LICENSE NO. RN156653

ISSUED TO:

BROOKE SUZANNE BENNETT,

RESPONDENT

No. 21A-[number redacted]-NUR

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: February 16, 2021, with the record held open until February 25, 2021.

APPEARANCES: Respondent Brooke Suzanne Bennett did not appear. The Arizona State Board of Nursing was represented by Assistant Attorney General Elizabeth Campbell who appeared via Google Meet.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Adam D. Stone

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

The Board has the authority to regulate and control the practice of nursing in the State of Arizona, pursuant to A.R.S. §§ 32-1606, 1663, and 1664. The Board also has the authority to determine whether licensees have committed unprofessional conduct, thereby furnishing cause for discipline under the Nurse Practice Act, A.R.S. §§ 32-1601 through 1667.

Respondent holds Board-issued registered nurse license number 156653.

On or about August 24, 2017, while driving in California, Respondent was involved in a hit and run motor vehicle accident and was found to be under the influence of alcohol. On October 27, 2017, Respondent pled guilty and was convicted of DUI, a misdemeanor.

On October 26, 2018, the California nursing board revoked Respondent’s RN license due to her DUI conviction, after Respondent failed to respond to the action.

On or about September 16, 2020, Respondent was involuntarily hospitalized at a behavioral health facility in Mesa, Arizona until September 24, 2020, for a behavioral health condition.

On or about September 23, 2020, Respondent was placed on court ordered behavioral health treatment for a period of one year.

Respondent failed to disclose the above incidents to the Board.

Stephanie Chambers, was the assigned Board investigator and testified to the above incidents. Ms. Chambers testified that during the course of her investigation, Respondent underwent treatment for a substance abuse disorder from June 24, 2015 to January 2019.

As to the DUI in California, Ms. Chambers testified that Respondent was to report the charge and ultimate conviction within 10 days of the same, and Respondent failed to do the same.

Ms. Chambers further testified that on or about October 5, 2020, she spoke with Respondent. Respondent reported that she had been having significant medical issues, including significant memory loss, intermittent vision loss and chronic pain. During the phone call, Respondent requested to voluntarily surrender her license. On October 9, 2020, a consent agreement for a voluntary surrender of her RN license was mailed to Respondent. Respondent did not sign or return the consent agreement.

Ms. Chambers next testified that she contacted Respondent on October 21, 2020, November 5, 2020, November 18, 2020 and November 24, 2020. Ms. Chambers testified that Respondent continued to display signs of a behavioral health condition which impaired her ability to safely practice as a nurse.

Ms. Chambers testified that during the November 24, 2020 phone call, Respondent became agitated and accused Ms. Chambers of harassing her. Respondent also stated that she never wanted to work as a nurse again, but would not return the consent agreement.

Ms. Chambers testified that she mailed an Investigative Questionnaire, via first-class mail, to Respondent at her address of record with the Board. Respondent failed to provide a written statement of the reported matter in violation of statute and rule.

Ms. Chambers then made a recommendation to the Board for a summary suspension of Respondent’s license.

On or about January 28, 2021, the Board summarily suspended Respondent’s registered nurse license and requested that proceedings be promptly instituted and determined.

On or about February 1, 2021, the Board issued a Complaint and Notice of Hearing, Summary Suspension Expedited Hearing, that alleged violations of A.R.S. § 32-3208(A) and (D), A.R.S. § 32-1601(26)(d), (e), (f), and (j) and A.A.C. R4-19-403(17), (25)(a), and (28).

The Notice of Hearing was sent via certified mail to Respondent at her address of record. Further, on or about January 29, 2021, the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) sent an Order converting the hearing to a “Google Meet” to Respondent’s address of record.

Respondent did not file a response or exhibits with OAH, nor did she request that the hearing be continued prior to the hearing convening. Although the start of the hearing was delayed 15 minutes to allow Respondent additional time, she did not appear, personally or through an attorney, and did not contact the OAH to request that the start of the hearing be further delayed prior to the hearing convening. Consequently, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend her Registered Nurse License.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The Notice of Hearing that the Board mailed to Respondent at her address of record was reasonable, and Respondent is deemed to have received notice of the hearing. See A.R.S. § 41-1092.04; A.R.S. § 41-1061(A).

This matter lies within the Board’s jurisdiction under A.R.S. § 32-1606(B)(10).

The Board bears the burden of proof and must establish cause to penalize Respondent’s registered nurse’s license by a preponderance of the evidence. See A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(G)(2); A.A.C. R2-19-119(A) and (B)(1); see also Vazanno v. Superior Court, 74 Ariz. 369, 372, 249 P.2d 837 (1952).

“A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.” Morris K. Udall, Arizona Law of Evidence § 5 (1960). A preponderance of the evidence is “evidence which is of greater weight or more convincing than evidence which is offered in opposition to it; that is, evidence which as a whole shows that the fact sought to be proved is more probable than not.” Black’s Law Dictionary 1120 (8th ed. 2004).

The Board established by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent engaged in unprofessional conduct as alleged in the Complaint and Notice of Hearing. As such, the Board established cause to impose a disciplinary sanction against Respondent’s license under A.R.S. § 32-1663(D) and A.R.S. § 32-1664(N).

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based on the foregoing, the Administrative Law Judge recommends that the Board affirm its order summarily suspending Respondent Brooke Suzanne Bennett’s Registered Nurse License number 156653.

It is further recommended that the Board revoke Respondent Brooke Suzanne Bennett’s Registered Nurse License number 156653.

In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge Decision by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the effective date of the Order will be five days from the date of that certification.

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000Done this day, March 4, 2021.

/s/ Adam D. Stone

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Joey Ridenour, RN, MN, Executive Director

State Board of Nursing

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000