Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. We also provide counsel specific to COVID-19. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

There are close to 1 million physicians licensed to practice medicine in the country. The vast majority sidesteps encounter with law enforcement.

Not all do.

It could be a DUI.

A barroom brawl.

Stalking.

Drugs.

Murder.

If you are arrested, do you have a duty to self-report to the Board of Medicine?

Well, it depends upon what you are arrested for and where you are licensed. Meaning, all states are different.

To give this color, North Carolina law mandates physicians have 30 days to self-report to the NC Medical Board “under GS 90-16, any felony arrest or indictment, any arrest for driving while impaired, and any arrest or indictment involving controlled substances.”

In California, under Section 802.1 physicians don’t have to report the arrest. But they must report indictment or charging of a felony. Here’s the specific language under the California Business and Professions Code:

A physician and surgeon, osteopathic physician and surgeon, a doctor of Podiatric medicine, and a physician assistant shall report either of the following to the entity that issued his or her license:

(a) (1) The bringing of an indictment or information charging a felony against the licensee.

(A) The conviction of the licensee, including any verdict of guilty, or plea of guilty or no contest, of any felony or misdemeanor.

(B) The report required by this subdivision shall be made in writing within 30 days of the date of the bringing of the indictment or information or of the   conviction.

(C) Failure to make a report required by this section shall be a public offense punishable by a fine not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000).

In Texas, under 22 TAC §173.3, physicians have 30 days to report conviction for a felony, a Class A or Class B misdemeanor, or a Class C misdemeanor involving moral turpitude.

In Texas, physicians must also self-report within 30 days:

(4) A description of any charges reported to the board to which the physician has pleaded no contest, for which the physician is the subject of deferred adjudication or pretrial diversion, or in which sufficient facts of guilt were found and the matter was continued by a court;

(5) An initial finding by the trier of fact of guilt of a felony under:

(A) Chapter 481 or 483, Health and Safety Code (relating to offenses involving controlled substances and dangerous drugs);

(B) Section 485.033, Health and Safety Code (relating to offenses involving inhalant paraphernalia); or

(C) the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. §801 et seq.);

It’s not clear what the meaning of “initial finding by the trier of fact of guilt of a felony” is. Is this prior to an appeal? Something else? Hard to say.

The point of this is that the duty to self-report to the Board varies state by state. In some states, you must report early – soon after an arrest. In other states, you do not have to report the arrest, but only after being charged/indicted of felony. In other states, you only have to self-report after you are adjudicated guilty or accept a plea of no-contest. Every state is different.

And remember, if you are arrested or indicted in one state and have licenses in multiple states, you will have different obligations in each state. But if you are disciplined by the Board in the most stringent state, a state where you may not even practice, that discipline can boomerang back to your home state and create a problem.

Take California as an example.

In Medical Board of California v. Superior Court (Lam) (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 1001, the court looked at the interplay between sections 141 & 2305 and upheld the application of both sections to physician disciplinary actions. It was specifically noted that even in cases where the out-of-state action would not have been grounds for discipline in California, section 141 permits the Medical Board to impose discipline. In other words, Section 141, is the catchall statute designed for a situation where the out of state misconduct does not mirror the disciplinary scheme in California such that the precise nature of the disciplinary action can be discerned. (Medical Board v. Superior Court (Lam) (2001) 88 Cal. App. 4th 1001, 1018-1019.)

As the Board persuasively argues, Dr. Lam’s construction would render without consequence out-of-state discipline where the basis for that discipline cannot be determined with precision, because, for instance, it was resolved by stipulation, and no charging documents had been made part of the record, as here. As one court has opined, limiting California discipline to circumstances in which “licensees admit culpability or where misconduct is proven in the foreign jurisdiction would make California a safe haven for medical practitioners who, in the face of charges of unprofessional conduct enter into consent decrees in other jurisdictions without making any admissions, leave that other jurisdiction, establish medical practices in California [88 Cal. App. 4th 1020] and thus avoid review of their medical practices by any licensing agency.” fn. 52 Nothing suggests the Legislature intended this result.

The take home points are this:

Be aware of self-reporting requirements to the various Boards of Medicine in which you hold licenses.

Discipline in one state can create reciprocal discipline in another state, even if the original basis for discipline would not rise to the level of being actionable in the “less onerous” self-reporting state.

So, be cautious about holding more licenses than you need to do your job.

What do you think?

Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. We also provide counsel specific to COVID-19. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

Jeffrey Segal, MD, JD

Chief Executive Officer and Founder

Dr. Jeffrey Segal, Chief Executive Officer and Founder of Medical Justice, is a board-certified neurosurgeon. Dr. Segal is a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons; the American College of Legal Medicine; and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons. He is also a member of the North American Spine Society. In the process of conceiving, funding, developing, and growing Medical Justice, Dr. Segal has established himself as one of the country’s leading authorities on medical malpractice issues, counterclaims, and internet-based assaults on reputation.

Dr. Segal was a practicing neurosurgeon for approximately ten years, during which time he also played an active role as a participant on various state-sanctioned medical review panels designed to decrease the incidence of meritless medical malpractice cases.

Dr. Segal holds a M.D. from Baylor College of Medicine, where he also completed a neurosurgical residency. Dr. Segal served as a Spinal Surgery Fellow at The University of South Florida Medical School. He is a member of Phi Beta Kappa as well as the AOA Medical Honor Society. Dr. Segal received his B.A. from the University of Texas and graduated with a J.D. from Concord Law School with highest honors.

In 2000, he co-founded and served as CEO of DarPharma, Inc, a biotechnology company in Chapel Hill, NC, focused on the discovery and development of first-of-class pharmaceuticals for neuropsychiatric disorders.

Dr. Segal is also a partner at Byrd Adatto, a national business and health care law firm. Byrd Adatto was selected as a Best Law Firm in the 2023 edition of the “Best Law Firms” list by U.S. News – Best Lawyers. With over 50 combined years of experience in serving doctors, dentists, and other providers, Byrd Adatto has a national pedigree to address most legal issues that arise in the business and practice of medicine.