Nurse standing trial for reporting Doctor

[scrub-jay]

I found this article interesting. At first glance, it looks like small town politics at work, but I also think there could be quite a bit more to the story. But what do you think?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/us/07nurses.html

[medpedspouse]

From the article, the sheriff sounds like a good ole boy protecting his buddy - not a law enforcement officer.

[scrub-jay]

From the article, the sheriff sounds like a good ole boy protecting his buddy - not a law enforcement officer.

BINGO! The doc saved his life, and he is using his power inappropriately. Even the hospital admin admits that this doctor has a history of being disciplined.

[Rapunzel]

The Texas Medical Association, the state and national nurse's association, even the hospital administration find this outrageous. I cannot possibly see how this could actually go to trial. Wouldn't a normal judge have it thrown out?!?

[MarissaNicole]

My initial reaction is that this is either a terrible case or that there really has to be more (like they were doing this on a work computer and sent it to other places or leaked it to the newspaper).

The key to a whistle blower protection is that the employee reports to the correct authority. Here the nurse clearly reported to the Medical Board which if you ask me is EVIDENCE of her good faith. If she had bad intentions she would have gone to the internet or the newspaper to cause harm to his reputation.

Sounds like politics. Perhaps the sheriff is up for reelection, or perhaps he has been in office too long and has a bit of a power issue?

[Vishenka69]

From the article, the sheriff sounds like a good ole boy protecting his buddy - not a law enforcement officer.

My thoughts exactly. He's accusing the nurses of making the case a personal matter while doing the same thing himself.

[SoonerTexan]

Wow Poor nurses.

[GrayMatterWife]

Wouldn't a normal judge have it thrown out?!?

Unlike in a civil case, where cases can get dismissed pretrial on a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment, criminal proceedings are different. I do not practice criminal law, so I could be a little rusty (or just misinformed) on the procedure, etc.--and I think there are several other attorneys on this site who would be able to speak more intelligently about criminal law than me. But, this is what I THINK I remember being the process in Texas:

I read this really quickly, but it sounds like this was her initial appearance--that's the first appearance in criminal court, which the law requires to be made within 48 hours/two days of arrest. At the initial appearance, the issue is bail--not guilt or whether there is probably cause to sustain the charges. After the initial appearance is the charging process. Texas law requires that felonies (and this is a felony) be charged by indictment upon a determination of probable cause made by a grand jury. Once the grand jury has found probable cause (it's called "true billing" the defendant), the district attorney's office files criminal charges. It is possible to fight the charges at the grand jury phase, but it is uncommon to do so (the standard of proof that must be satisfied by the district attorney is not "reasonable doubt"--it is comparatively easy to get true billed). And, often it is not advisable to fight the charges because you'd probably have to put the defendant on the stand, and the defendant is not entitled to the same protections and legal representations at a grand jury proceeding as he would be at a trial.

Once the indictment is made by the grand jury and charges are filed, the defendant goes to the next court appearance--the arraignment--where he's officially "informed" of the charges (ie, read the charges--although the reading can be waived) and a plea is entered.

After this, you can start talking to the district attorney about the appropriateness of dropping the charges, reducing them on a plea, etc. If that doesn't work and the matter goes to trial, then after the prosecution has put on its "case in chief," the defendant can move for a directed verdict or a verdict in its favor from the bench (depending on whether the case is proceeding before a jury or before the judge as the trier of fact)--if the defendant can argue that the prosecution failed to sustain its burden of proof.

And, for whatever it's worth, I thought it was appalling, and a really bad idea, that the Sheriff--the arresting entity--made a personal comment about the doctor being such a great, compassionate, caring guy. What the heck??!! I'm betting the district attorney is rolling over in agony at that blabber-mouthed remark.

[HouseofWool]

My initial reaction is that this is either a terrible case or that there really has to be more (like they were doing this on a work computer and sent it to other places or leaked it to the newspaper).

The key to a whistle blower protection is that the employee reports to the correct authority. Here the nurse clearly reported to the Medical Board which if you ask me is EVIDENCE of her good faith. If she had bad intentions she would have gone to the internet or the newspaper to cause harm to his reputation.

Sounds like politics. Perhaps the sheriff is up for reelection, or perhaps he has been in office too long and has a bit of a power issue?

I would be surprised if they wrote the letters anyplace other than work. They said that they referenced cases by file numbers and I am guessing that they weren't likely to bring that sort of priveledged information home given the position they were putting themselves.

No matter what, I don't understand why the doc would go to the sherriff. Either there is way more to the story or the prosecutor is a dipshit to even file the charges.

[Meenah]

Total BS, but I can see this happening at many hospitals, especially local community hospitals. I have seen it where I have worked in the past. I do hope the Texas board of Nursing will stand up for them. I want to send $$$$$ for their defense fund.

[NYCHoosier]

Re: Nurse standing trial for reporting Doctor

She was found Not Guilty:

http://abcnews.go.com/m/screen?id=9781119


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MarissaNicole]

Excuse my former comments - I was thinking CIVIL not criminal, thats why this case is SO odd!

I thought it was neat that they raised $40,000 for her defense! It also says they have now filed a civil suit. I hope wrongful termination is a part of that case because she has a great claim!

I am predicting an amendment to the law that the charges were filed against - some specific language being added so that that statute cannot be used in the same manner again, because I highly doubt that was the intended use when it was drafted!

My guess is also that the prosecutor that filed the charges also has a disciplinary charge filed against him as a result of this (attorneys have the same duty to report eachother for misconduct, and can be disciplined for failure to do so).

[MarissaNicole]

So I skimmed the Complaint and Exhibits of the case filed by the nurses ....and I there was a memo from the DA stating that if the nurses accept their termination and agree not to file any civil suit the CRIMINAL charges will be dropped.....

Wow that looks pretty shady if you ask me!

(I do employment law so this case is super interesting to me!)

And randomly, the Sheriff's name is Robert Roberts

[DCJenn]

and did you see that the Sheriff requested a copy of the complaint from the Texas Board of Medical Examiners who were under the impression that he was using it to investigate the doctor, not the nurses. TMB is going to have a change in their procedures I'll bet.

Jenn

[Rapunzel]

And randomly, the Sheriff's name is Robert Roberts

Sheriff Bob Bob!

Or

Sheriff Bobby Bob!