a{;4patientsafety.org/documents/zander, alla 2016-012-20.pdf · 2018. 1. 7. · of the state...

BEFORE THE MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS STATE OF CALIFORNIA

In the Matter of the Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation Against:

ALLA ZANDER, M.D.

Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate No. A 61985

Respondent

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 8002013001809

__________________________ )

DECISION AND ORDER

The attached Proposed Decision is hereby adopted as the Decision and Order of the Medical Board of California, Department of Consumer Affairs, State of California.

This Decision shall become effective at 5:00p.m. on February 19, 2016.

IT IS SO ORDERED January 20,2016.

MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA

By: /)... A{;.... , .-AU

Howard Krauss, M.D., Chair Panel B



In the Matter of the Accusation Against:

ALLA ZANDER, M.D.,

Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate Number A 61985,

Respondent.

Case No. 800-2013-001809

OAH No. 2015040599

PROPOSED DECISION

Administrative Law Judge Ralph B. Dash heard this matter in Los Angeles, California on December 7, 2015.

Tan Tran, Deputy, Deputy Attorney General, represented Complainant.

Joel B. Douglas, Attorney at Law, represented Alia Zander, M.D. (Respondent).

Oral and documentary evidence having been received and the matter having been submitted, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following Proposed Decision.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Kimberly Kirchmeyer made the Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation in her official capacity as the Executive Director of the Medical Board of California (Board).

2. The Board issued Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate Number A 61985 to Respondent on April 4, 1997. The certificate has been renewed through October 31, 2016. As set forth in the license history (Exhibit 4) and as more fully described below, "on February 8, 2002 an ACCUSATION was filed against Dr. ZANDER, and on December 20, 2002, a DECISION became effective which read: REVOKED, STAYED, FIVE YEARS PROBATION WITH TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND TWENTY DAYS ACTUAL SUSPENSION BEGINNING THE SIXTEENTH DAY FROM THE DATE OF THIS DECISION. The suspension began January 5, 2003 and ended on January 25, 2003. On July 27,2005, an ACCUSATION AND PETITION TO REVOKE PROBATION was filed and on October 26, 2007, a DECISION became effective which read: REVOKED, STAYED,

SEVEN YEARS PROBATION. On February 27,2014 an ACCUSATION AND PETITION TO REVOKE PROBATION was filed and the matter is now pending."

3. At the hearing, Respondent admitted the truth of all factual allegations contained in the pending Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation (Exhibit 1 ). Accordingly, the following allegations are deemed proven by clear and convincing evidence:

August 2012 Conviction

9. On or about October 26, 2007, a Decision and Order "In the Matter of the Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation Against Alia Zander," Medical Board Case No. D 1-2000-108645, became effective. Respondent was placed on probation for seven years. Condition 10 of the Order requires that the Respondent obey all laws.

10. On or about August 6, 2012, Respondent attempted to steal store merchandise from a Ralph's in Laguna Hills, California. On or about August 8, 2012, Respondent was charged with one count of Second Degree Commercial Burglary, in violation of Penal Code sections 459-460(b ).

11. On or about August 21, 2012, Respondent explained to Medical Board Investigators in an interview that she suffers from kleptomania along with bulimia nervosa. Respondent admitted to getting a "quick fix" from binging and purging, as well as from stealing food from grocery stores. She likened the feeling she experiences to the adrenaline rush drug users experience.

12. On or about August 27, 2012, in Orange County Superior Court, in case number 12HM1 0019, upon her plea of guilty Respondent was convicted of Second Degree Commercial Burglary, violating Penal Code section 459-460(b ), a misdemeanor. [~] ... [~]

DISCIPLINE CONSIDERATIONS

19. To determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on Respondent, Complainant alleges that on or about October 26, 2007, "In the Matter of the Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation Against Alia Zander," Medical Board Case No. D1-2000-108645, Respondent's license was revoked with revocation stayed and seven years probation imposed based on multiple admitted probation violations, including one charge for trespass at an Albertson's, an attempt to steal merchandise from Daisy Shoppe in Mission Viejo, California, failure to comply with weekly psychotherapy requirements, failure to submit quarterly probation reports, and failure to notify the Medical Board of her return to the practice of medicine. That decision is now final and is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth.

2

20. To further determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on Respondent, Complainant alleges that on or about March 12, 2003, Respondent attempted to steal store merchandise from an Albertson's in Mission Viejo, California. On or about April 22, 2003, in proceedings entitled People of the State of California v. Alta Zander, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 03SMB 1745, Respondent was charged with violating Penal Code section 610(1), Trespassing. On or about June 18, 2003, Respondent was arrested by her criminal probation officer for violating her probation due to the trespassing incident that occurred on March 12, 2003.

21. To turther determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on Respondent, Complainant alleges that on or about December 20, 2002, "In the Matter of the Accusation Against Alla Zander," Medical Board case No. 04-2000-108645, the Respondent's license was revoked with revocation stayed and five years probation imposed based on three admitted petty theft convictions. That decision is now final and is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth.

22. To further determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on Respondent, Complainant alleges that on or about August 5, 1999, in People ofthe State ofCalifornia v. Alla Zander, Orange County Superior Court Case No. FV99WM0706, Respondent was convicted of violating Penal Code section 488, Petty Theft.

23. To further determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on Respondent, Complainant alleges that on or about October 21, 1999, in People of the State ofCalifornia v. Alla Zander, Orange County Superior Court Case No. SM99SM59791, Respondent was convicted of violating Penal Code section 488, Petty Theft.

24. To further determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on Respondent, Complainant alleges that on or about December 13, 2000, in People ofthe State ofCalifornia v. Alia Zander, Orange County Superior Court Case No. SHOOSM04959, Respondent was convicted of violating Penal Code section 488, Theft with a Prior Conviction.

25. To further determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on Respondent, Complainant alleges that on or about October 9, 2001, in People of the State ofCalifornia v. Alla Zander, Orange County Superior Court Case No. SHOISM04843, Respondent was convicted of violating Penal Code sections 459-460(b), General Burglary.

4. Respondent's criminal history is far more extensive than even the foregoing admissions would suggest. The evidence showed that Respondent shoplifted dozens, if not hundreds, of times without getting caught. Prior to the Board first placing Respondent on

3

probation, it required her to undergo a psychiatric evaluation. The October 15, 2001 report of the psychiatrist, David J. Shetiener, M.D. (Exhibit L ), contains admissions Respondent made regarding the frequency of her thievery. That report reads, in part:

[S]he stated the actual problem began in 1990, i.e., shoplifting. As she began to talk about the above subject, her mood became diminished, and she cited her embarrassment; she states she began shoplifting at approximately age 25, in Russia, on two occasions, stating she took food (although acknowledging that she did not really need it). She then went on to add that she has been bulimic since age 15, and she states she associates it in her mind with the stealing of food. She states she began shoplifting in the U.S.A. in 1990, at first always taking food, but then taking "anything and everything," mostly in grocery stores, although she states later on there were several incidents in department stores. As I explored this with her further, she stated that in the last few years she would shoplift almost every time she went to the store (which was approximately every other day), and only on rare occasions did not steal when in the store. She states she would steal numerous items on the same occasion, and went on to note, "it was like excitement," stating the actual item was not important, and when I asked her as to whether or not she had an intent to steal when she went to the store, she responded, "in back of my mind," she knew she would steal, "but it's not like I deliberately went for it," stating she would experience relief from "the tension, restlessness it just makes me feel better."

5. The foregoing is virtually a textbook description of kleptomania. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, 2013, a widely used and readily accepted publication on diseases of the mind says the following about kleptomania, at pages 4 78-4 79:

Diagnostic Criteria 312.32 (F63.3)

A. Recurrent failure to resist impulses to steal objects that are not needed for personal use or for their monetary value.

B. Increasing sense of tension immediately before committing the theft.

C. Pleasure, gratification, or relief at the time of committing the theft.

D. The stealing is not committed to express anger or vengeance and is not in response to a delusion or a hallucination.

E. The stealing is not better explained by conduct disorder, a manic episode, or antisocial personality disorder.

4

The essential feature of kleptomania is the recurrent failure to resist impulses to steal items even though the items are not needed for personal use or for their monetary value (CriterionA). The individual experiences a rising subjective sense oftension before the theft (Criterion B) and feels pleasure, gratification, or relief when committing the theft (Criterion C). The stealing is not committed to express anger or vengeance, is not done in response to a delusion or hallucination (Criterion D), and is not better explained by conduct disorder, a manic episode, or antisocial personality disorder (Criterion E). The objects are stolen despite the fact that they are typically of little value to the individual, who could have afforded to pay for them and often gives them away or discards them. Occasionally the individual may hoard the stolen objects or surreptitiously return them. Although individuals with this disorder will generally avoid stealing when immediate arrest is probable (e.g., in full view of a police officer), they usually do not preplan the thefts or fully take into account the chances of apprehension. The stealing is done without assistance from, or collaboration with, others.

Kleptomania may be associated with compulsive buying as well as with depressive and bipolar disorders (especially major depressive disorder), anxiety disorders, eating disorders (particularly bulimia nervosa), personality disorders, substance use disorders (especially alcohol use disorder), and other disruptive, impulse-control, and conduct disorders.

6. Dr. Sheffner did not believe that Respondent's psychiatric conditions precluded her from the practice of medicine. He was, however, concerned that Respondent might ·'decompensate.'' Whether Respondent's multiple theft convictions while she was on Board probation amounted to decompensation was not addressed by any expert evidence.

7. Respondent's description of her personal turmoil has not substantially changed from the first time Dr. Sheffner examined her in 2001 through the date of the hearing of this matter. Dr. Sheffner had the opportunity to examine Respondent in 2003 and again in 2005. In his second evaluation of Respondent, as set forth in his report of January 30, 2003 (Exhibit K), Respondent noted how the untoward effects of her criminal conduct affected her personal and professional life, yet how she was unable to control her compulsion to steal. In his 2003 report, Dr. Sheffner stated, in part:

When I inquired more specifically as to her behaviors during the interim, i.e., from September 2001 to March of 2002, she acknowledged that she shoplifted during that time period on approximately 10 occasions (taking food; she states she was not caught), and she claims that since March 2002 she has not engaged in any shoplifting. When I attempted to inquire why, she responded, ·'It was a really big blow on my husband, my profession, and my whole life -- I lost everything," i.e., "turmoil since then," stating her husband was "extremely -just blown away" (she states there were no problems with the INS, although she expected such). I then attempted to discuss the above statements made by

5

her, i.e., in conjunction with the history/her situation at the time I first saw her (i.e., she was already in major/repeated trouble in major areas of her life), she stating, "I made a decision to stop it," and that after jail, "I had a major talk with my husband," she noting how he had been "profoundly upset" at the time and told her that she'd lose her children/marriage (and that he'd move away) and that she couldn't work as a physician, she adding, "this time it was really a disaster-- he was so upset and hopeless," she citing how "the urge is still there" but when it comes, she leaves the store (when I explored this with her further, e.g., as to why she doesn't have her husband do the shopping, she claimed that he was "too busy" to do such; she notes she doesn't take her purse when she goes shopping, i.e., this is where she had hidden the items she stole), and she only enters the store with her wallet.

She states she feels she is doing "really good" with regard to her state of wellbeing/functioning, and notes she's on Effexor (an anti-depressant/anti-anxiety agent) 75 milligrams t.i.d., she adding, "I'm very energetic and positive." When I asked about her bulimia, she responded, "better, but not completely well," i.e., she engages in this about three times a week (noting this used to be daily), she then adding, "I'm in a much better place now," stating this is because "I feel like nothing is not possible."

8. Despite telling Dr. Sheffner in 2003 that she was able to control her compulsion, Respondent continued to steal. In his third evaluation of Respondent, contained in his report of July 27, 2005 (Exhibit J), Dr. Sheffner noted that Respondent admitted shoplifting an average of "three to four times a week." Respondent went on to tell Dr. Sheffner, again, that due to her continuing therapy, and the untoward effect ofher convictions on her personal life (i.e., potential deportation as well as the Board action), "I feel like I can finally make a quantum leap ... I have no more shots left-ifi ever get arrested [again] ... my family's going to fall apart ... [my medical career would] be goner just can't live like that .... " Respondent added that her coping techniques included simply not going into any stores. She told Dr. Sheffner, "There is always a bottom one needs to hit before you realize- well, I'm not a fast learner, what can I tell you."

9. Dr. Sheffner concluded his 2005 report with the following statement, which seemed to be a preview of the findings of Respondent's current treating psychiatrist, more fully discussed below:

1. We are presented with a continuing cycle of shoplifting, Dr. Zander saying how she's benefited from psychiatric treatment, how she feels the consequences are too grave to continue to shoplift, yet she continues to shoplift and change her mental health professionals, displays decreased insight as to her difficulties, and since I first consulted in this matter, she has been experiencing the possibility of very grave consequences for continued shoplifting. Admittedly, her stay at Sober Living by the Sea has been a

6

different/relatively intensive form of treatment, but just how much or lasting benefit this has been is a matter which only time will tell.

2. I continue to view Dr. Zander as a deeply disturbed individual (as has been previously described, and was further commented on by, e.g., Dr. Helfend). As before, it is particularly concerning that her continued shoplifting/arrests is going to have very severe consequences for her (in many areas of her life), such consequences (or anticipated consequences) serving as a severe stressor/cause of additional life crises/problems for her, and engendering concomitant emotional reactions to such stressors.

3. As before, I'm concerned that such emotional reactions (e.g., depression, anxiety, distractibility/decreased concentration) could then impair her thinking/judgment with regard to the demands of functioning as a physician.

The above item, while in my opinion a realistic and justified concern, is admittedly speculative (and is theoretically applicable to any physician experiencing severe life stresses/problems).

Furthermore, the above being said, we note that such impairment (and therefore danger to patients) has not been borne out by the events/passage of time in the interim since I last consulted with Dr. Zander in January 2003 (except for an apparently brief episode in July 2004 when Dr. Helfend consulted with her just after her new arrest, as noted).

The above statement, however, is qualified by the fact that, as far as I can tell, we have had no direct input from any of Dr. Zander's fellow health professionals who actually observe her functioning as a physician (with the exception of Dr. Rexinger, who saw no problems from 2000 through 2002).

4. With regard to her recent/current psychiatric status, it is noted:

A. Dr. Zander's mental status exam is within normal limits.

B. The recent clinical history is devoid of substantial psychiatric complaints.

C. Dr. Zander's psychological testing (which is valid, e.g., not invalidated because of defensiveness) indicates the absence of, e.g., substantial symptoms of depression/anxiety.

5. In sum, notwithstanding Dr. Zander's severe personal problems/repeated shoplifting/the possible consequences of

7

such, I find that she does not currently manifest any psychiatric symptoms of the nature or magnitude to render her unsafe to engage in the solo practice of medicine.

10. Unfortunately, despite stating she "had no more shots left," Respondent suffered her 2012 conviction (which has now been expunged). There was no evidence that Respondent had any conviction more recent than 2012; however, that does not mean she no longer suffers from kleptomania nor that she no longer steals. Respondent has been treating with Alex D. Michelson, M.D. a board certified psychiatrist, for the past 10 years. Dr. Michelson prepared a report (Exhibit G) and also testified. In his report, Dr. Michelson diagnosed Respondent with kleptomania, bulimia nervosa, and major depression (in remission).

11. Despite his diagnosis, Dr. Michelson does not believe Respondent's psychiatric conditions preclude her from safely practicing medicine. Respondent has never been accused of having stolen from patients. Dr. Michelson explained that a theft from patients "would not create the psychological benefits that shoplifting provides [to Respondent]." He believes that Respondent is not dishonest; rather she has a compulsion over which she has no absolute control. He stated that it is sometimes easier for Respondent to steal than to leave items on the shelf "because she is so conflicted." Dr. Michelson believes that Respondent needs continuous psychiatric care "for at least the next five years."

12. Dr. Michelson prepared a report in 2007 (Exhibit I) for the Board's use when it brought the Accusation which extended for seven years Respondent's initial probation. This earlier report serves to establish that Respondent's psychiatric condition has remained essentially unchanged for the past 14 years. The following is an excerpt of Dr. Michelson's 2007 report which bears a striking resemblance to his 2015 report and his testimony in this proceeding:

During our sessions with Dr. Zander, we have clearly determined that she has an illness which requires continuous therapy and effort until control over her impulses is established. At this point, she has been free of shoplifting activities for more than two years. Her risk of stealing from patients, defrauding insurance companies and committing acts of theft in medical settings is comparable to average statistics, since stealing among kleptomaniacs is limited usually to nonsensical items. I think her risk of stealing in stores is higher than average due to the severity of her illness. During therapy Dr. Zander developed insight into her previous kleptomaniac activities and will strive to control her impulses in the future. That will depend on her ability to express her feelings and frustrations in a socially acceptable fashion. Remission of her symptoms should be supported by stable family relationships and successful professional practice. [~] ... [~]

Dr. Zander has been suffering from severe mental illnesses which responded to treatment. Her symptoms of kleptomania and major depression

8

have been in remission. Bulimic episodes tend to persist with a frequency of 3-5 times per week. Concerns of Dr. Zander stealing from patients, insurance companies or colleagues are not substantiated, since these activities are not in the scope of her illness. Kleptomaniacs usually steal useless and unnecessary items which they tend to discard after time passes. Dr. Zander lacked malicious premeditations in her actions. Her shopliftings were based on impulsive urges, which she could not refrain from. These urges were the products of her mental illness. Risk factors in her possible relapse are represented by increased levels of stress and suppressed ability to express her feelings and frustrations. Bulimic activities are used to decrease tension and stress in general. Practicing different relaxation techniques and socially acceptable forms of self expression, as well as compliance with her treatment are crucial in her recovery. Regardless of Dr. Zander's conditions she has been able to practice medicine safely. Absence of malpractice cases and complaints (per Mrs. Randie Minovitz, peer review program at CAP MPT malpractice insurance carrier) confirms her ability to perform under pressure without decompensation. She remains safe to practice medicine given her current level of functioning.

13. Respondent testified and, much as she told both Dr. Sheffner and Dr. Michelson, noted the "pain, shame, and self-loathing" she feels after shoplifting. The items she takes are typically of small value and she can easily afford to pay for them. However, she also noted that when she "feels the irresistible urge to steal" that she "is in my own world, I cannot stop myself." She noted that during the theft which gave rise to her most recent conviction, she knew she was being watched and even that did not deter her from stealing. She also claimed, much as she had in the past, that her shoplifting is now "much less of a problem." When she goes into a store she does not bring her purse (where she would hide stolen items) but only a credit card which, she noted "makes it harder to steal" even when she has the urge to do so. However, she did not testify that she no longer has the desire to steal, nor that she has not stolen anything since her 2012 conviction.

14. It may be true that Respondent is not dishonest per se, and that she has a compulsion to steal that does not affect her ability to practice medicine. But whether or not Respondent is "dishonest," she nevertheless has committed, and continues to commit, acts of dishonesty. Theft crimes are inherently dishonest and, when committed by a doctor, bring disrepute to the medical profession. ''The best indicator of future conduct is past conduct." 1

Respondent has been under psychiatric care for at least the past 14 years, but has

Under Government Code section 11425.50, subdivision (c)," ... The presiding officer's experience, technical competence, and specialized knowledge may be used in evaluating evidence." During the past 27 years and 9 months, this Administrative Law Judge, who has been on the Medical Quality Hearing Panel since its inception, has presided over hundreds of proceedings where a respondent has committed multiple illegal acts. Dozens of expert witnesses, including psychiatrists, psychologists, and addictionologists, have testified that best way one can predict future behavior is by a review of past behavior.

9

nevertheless continued to steal. She fully understands the nature of her conduct, and is powerless to change it. A standard term of every Board probation is that the probationer must "obey all laws." Respondent has proven that she is incapable of doing so. At this juncture, having been given so many chances by the Board, Respondent's reasons for her conduct are no longer relevant. The Board cannot tolerate having a licensee who has not, for any appreciable period of time, responded to her therapy and who has demonstrated convincingly that she is unable to comply with a standard term of probation. The Board has no choice at this time but to revoke Respondent's certificate to practice medicine.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The standard of proof which must be met to establish the charging allegations herein is "clear and convincing evidence." (Ettinger v. Board of Medical Quality Assurance (1982) 135 Cal.App.3d 853.) This means the burden rests with Complainant to offer proof that is clear, explicit and unequivocal--so clear as to leave no substantial doubt and sufficiently strong to command the unhesitating assent of every reasonable mind. (Katie V v. Superior Court (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 586, 594.)

2. The purpose of the Medical Practice Act2 is to assure the high quality of medical practice; in other words, to keep unqualified and undesirable persons and those guilty of unprofessional conduct out ofthe medical profession. (Shea v. Board of Medical Examiners ( 1978) 81 Cal.App. 3d 564, 574.) The imposition oflicense discipline does not depend on whether patients were injured by unprofessional medical practices. (See, Bryce v. Board of Medical Quality Assurance ( 1986) 184 Cal.App.3d. 1471; Fahmy v. Medical Board ofCalifornia (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 810, 817.) Our courts have long held that the purpose of physician discipline by the Board is not penal but to "protect the life, health and welfare of the people at large and to set up a plan whereby those who practice medicine will have the qualifications which will prevent, as far as possible, the evils which could result from ignorance or incompetency or a lack of honesty and integrity." (Furnish v. Board of Medical Examiners (1957) 149 Cal.App.2d 326, 331.

3. Business and Professions Code section 2234 provides, in part:

The board shall take action against any licensee who is charged with unprofessional conduct. In addition to other provisions of this article, unprofessional conduct includes, but is not limited to, the following: [~] ... [~]

(e) The commission of any act involving dishonesty or corruption that is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon.

2 Business and Professions Code sections 2000 through 2521.

10

4. Business and professions Code section 2236 states, in relevant part:

(a) The conviction of any offense substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon constitutes unprofessional conduct within the meaning of this chapter. The record of conviction shall be conclusive evidence only of the fact that the conviction occurred. [~] ... [~]

(d) A plea or verdict of guilty or a conviction after a plea of nolo contendere is deemed to be a conviction within the meaning of this section and Section 2236.1. The record of conviction shall be conclusive evidence of the fact that the conviction occurred.

5. '·Unprofessional conduct is that conduct which breaches the rules or ethical code of a profession, or conduct which is unbecoming a member in good standing of a profession. (Citation.)" (Shea, supra (1978) 81 Cal.App.3d at 574.) In Krain v. Medical Board (1999) 71 Cal.App.4th 1416, 1424-1425, the court had occasion to determine whether a dishonest act performed by a physician outside the context of the doctor-patient relationship could form the basis for license discipline. In determining that the dishonest conduct was substantially related to the functions, duties and qualifications of a medical doctor, the court stated:

Krain's conviction may properly form the basis of discipline only if it is "substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon .... "(§ 2236, subd. (a).) Whether such a relationship exists is a question of law "for this court's independent determination. [Citations.]" (Gromis v. Medical Board (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 589, 598, 10 Cal.Rptr.2d 452.)

Krain contends that his conviction for solicitation of subornation of perjury does not bear a substantial relationship to his qualifications as a physician. Based on Windham v. Board of Medical Quality Assurance ( 1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 461, 163 Cal.Rptr. 566 (Windham), we reject Krain's contention. In Windham, a physician was disciplined as a result of his conviction for tax fraud. In that case, the physician argued "that while tax fraud may adversely reflect on his moral character, it is not the type oftransgression which reflects on his professional qualifications, functions or duties." (!d. at p. 4 70, 163 Cal.Rptr. 566.) The Court of Appeal rejected this argument: "First of all, we find it difficult to compartmentalize dishonesty in such a way that a person who is willing to cheat his government out of $65,000 in taxes may yet be considered honest in his dealings with his patients. In this connection, however, we should point out that today's doctor deals financially with the government-state, local and federal-in many ways that have nothing to do with his own personal tax obligation .... [~] ... Above all, however, there is the relation between doctor and patient. It is unnecessary to describe the extent to

1 1

which that particular relationship is based on utmost trust and confidence in the doctor's honesty and integrity." (Windham, supra, 104 Cal.App.3d at p. 4 70, 163 Cal.Rptr. 566.)

Krain's conviction for soliciting the subornation ofperjury, like the tax fraud conviction at issue in Windham, involves dishonesty. We agree with the reasoning of Windham: the intentional solicitation to commit a crime which has as its hallmark an act of dishonesty cannot be divorced from the obligation of utmost honesty and integrity to the patients whom the physician counsels, as well as numerous third-party entities and payors who act on behalf of patients. (Windham, supra, 104 Cal.App.3d at p. 4 70, 163 Cal.Rptr. 566; see also Matanky v. Board of Medical Examiners (1978) 79 Cal.App.3d 293, 305-306, 144 Cal.Rptr. 826.) Krain's plea of guilty to solicitation of subornation of perjury is substantially related to his qualifications as a physician.

6. Respondent has violated the provisions of the Medical Practice Act, in particular Business and Professions Code sections 2234, subdivision (e) and 2236, subdivisions (a) and (b), by reason ofher 2012 conviction, as set forth in Finding 3. The severity of the below Order is deemed necessary in light of Respondent's continuing pattern of illegal behavior as set forth in that Finding and by her own admissions, as set forth in Findings 4, 7, 8, 12, and 13.

ORDER

WHEREFORE, THE FOLLOWING ORDER is hereby made:

Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate Number A 61985 issued to Alla Zander is revoked.

Date: / ,; -) ; --(~

12

RALPH B. DASH' / Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney General of California ROBERT McKIM BELL Supervising Deputy Attorney General MICHEL W. VALENTINE State Bar No. 153078

California Department of Justice 300 South Spring Street, Suite 1702 Los Angeles, California 90013 Telephone: (213) 897-1034 Facsimile: (213) 897-9395

Attorneysfor Complainant Medical Board ofCalifornia




ALLA ZANDER, M.D. Also known as ALLA SVERDLOV A

23961 Calle De La Magdalena Laguna Hills, CA 92653

Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate A 61985,

Respondent.

Complainant alleges:

Case No. 8002013001809

ACCUSATION AND

PETITION TO REVOKE PROBATION

PARTIES

1. Kimberly Kirchmeyer (Complainant) brings this Accusation and Petition to Revoke

Probation solely in her official capacity as the Executive Director of the Medical Board of

California ("Board").

2. On April 4, 1997, the Board issued Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate number A

61985 to Alla Zander, M.D. (Respondent). That license was in full force and effect at all times

relevant to the charges brought herein and will expire on October 31, 2014, unless renewed.

JURISDICTION

3. This Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation is brought before the Board under

Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation

1 the authority of the following provisions ofthe California Business and Professions Code and in

2 accordance with the Board's earlier Decision and Order "In the Matter of the Accusation and

3 Petition to Revoke Probation Against Alla Zander," Medical Board Case No. D1-2000-108645,

4 a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. All section references are to the Business and

5 Professions Code unless otherwise indicated.

6 4. Section 2227 of the Code provides that a licensee who is found guilty under the

7 Medical Practice Act may have his or her license revoked, suspended for a period not to exceed

8 one year, placed on probation and required to pay the costs of probation monitoring, or such other

9 action taken in relation to discipline as the Division 1 deems proper.

10 5. Section 2234 ofthe Code, states:

11 "The board shall take action against any licensee who is charged with unprofessional

12 conduct. In addition to other provisions of this article, unprofessional conduct includes, but is not

13 limited to, the following:

14 "(a) Violating or attempting to violate, directly or indirectly, assisting in or abetting the

15 violation of, or conspiring to violate any provision of this chapter [Chapter 5, the Medical

16 Practice Act].

17 "(b) Gross negligence.

18 "(c) Repeated negligent acts. To be repeated, there must be two or more negligent acts or

19 omissions. An initial negligent act or omission followed by a separate and distinct departure from

20 the applicable standard of care shall constitute repeated negligent acts.

21 "(1) An initial negligent diagnosis followed by an act or omission medically appropriate

22 for that negligent diagnosis of the patient shall constitute a single negligent act.

23 "(2) When the standard of care requires a change in the diagnosis, act, or omission that

24 constitutes the negligent act described in paragraph (1 ), including, but not limited to, a

25

26

27

28

1 Business and Professions Code section 2002, as amended and effective January 1, 2008, provides that, unless otherwise expressly provided, the term "Board" as used in the State Medical Practice Act (Bus. & Prof. Code," 2000, et seq.) means the Medical Board of California, and references to the Division of Medical Quality and Division of Licensing in the Act or any other provision of law shall be deemed to refer to the Board.

2 Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation

1 reevaluation of the diagnosis or a change in treatment, and the licensee's conduct departs from the

2 applicable standard of care, each departure constitutes a separate and distinct breach of the

3 standard of care.

4 "(d) Incompetence.

5 "(e) The commission of any act involving dishonesty or corruption which is substantially

6 related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon.

7 "(f) Any action or conduct which would have warranted the denial of a certificate.

8 "(g) The practice of medicine from this state into another state or country without meeting

9 the legal requirements of that state or country for the practice of medicine. Section 2314 shall not

10 apply to this subdivision. This subdivision shall become operative upon the implementation of the

11 proposed registration program described in Section 2052.5.

12 "(h) The repeated failure by a certificate holder, in the absence of good cause, to attend and

13 participate in an interview scheduled by the mutual agreement of the certificate holder and the

14 board. This subdivision shall only apply to a certificate holder who is the subject of an

15 investigation by the board."

16 6. Section 2236 ofthe Code states:

17 (a) The conviction of any offense substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or

18 duties of a physician and surgeon constitutes unprofessional conduct within the meaning of this

19 chapter [Chapter 5, the Medical Practice Act]. The record of conviction shall be conclusive

20 evidence only of the fact that the conviction occurred.

21 (b) The district attorney, city attorney, or other prosecuting agency shall notify the Division

22 of Medical Quality of the pendency of an action against a licensee charging a felony or

23 misdemeanor immediately upon obtaining information that the defendant is a licensee. The

24 notice shall identify the licensee and describe the crimes charged and the facts alleged. The

25 prosecuting agency shall also notify the clerk of the court in which the action is pending that the

26 defendant is a licensee, and the clerk shall record prominently in the file that the defendant holds

27 a license as a physician and surgeon.

28 (c) The clerk of the court in which a licensee is convicted of a crime shall, within 48 hours


after the conviction, transmit a certified copy of the record of conviction to the board. The

2 division may inquire into the circumstances surrounding the commission of a crime in order to fix

3 the degree of discipline or to determine if the conviction is of an offense substantially related to

4 the qualifications, functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon.

5 (d) A plea or verdict of guilty or a conviction after a plea of nolo contendere is deemed to

6 be a conviction within the meaning of this section and Section 2236.1. The record of conviction

7 shall be conclusive evidence of the fact that the conviction occurred.@

8 7. California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 1360, states:

9 For the purposes of denial, suspension or revocation of a license, certificate or permit

10 pursuant to Division 1.5 (commencing with Section 475) of the code, a crime or act shall be

11 considered to be substantially related to the qualifications, functions or duties of a person holding

12 a license, certificate or permit under the Medical Practice Act if to a substantial degree it

13 evidences present or potential unfitness of a person holding a license, certificate or permit to

14 perform the functions authorized by the license, certificate or permit in a manner consistent with

15 the public health, safety or welfare. Such crimes or acts shall include but not be limited to the

16 following: Violating or attempting to violate, directly or indirectly, or assisting in or abetting the

17 violation of, or conspiring to violate any provision of the Medical Practice Act.@

18 FIRST CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

19 (Acts Involving Dishonesty or Corruption)

20 8. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under section 2234, subdivision (e), in

21 that she committed acts of dishonesty or corruption substantially related to the qualifications,

22 functions, and duties of a physician and surgeon. The circumstances are as follows:

23 August 2012 Conviction

24 9. On or about October 26, 2007, a Decision and Order "In the Matter of the Accusation

25 and Petition to Revoke Probation Against Alia Zander," Medical Board Case No. D1-2000-

26 108645, became effective. Respondent was placed on probation for seven years. Condition 10 of

27 the Order requires that the Respondent obey all laws.

28 10. On or about August 6, 2012, Respondent attempted to steal store merchandise from a


Ralph's in Laguna Hills, California. On or about August 8, 2012, Respondent was charged with

2 one count of Second Degree Commercial Burglary, in violation of Penal Code sections 459-

3 460(b).

4 11. On or about August 21, 2012, Respondent explained to Medical Board Investigators

5 in an interview that she suffers from kleptomania along with bulimia nervosa. Respondent

6 admitted to getting a "quick fix" from binging and purging, as well as from stealing food from

7 grocery stores. She likened the feeling she experiences to the adrenaline rush drug users

8 expenence.

9 12. On or about August 27, 2012, in Orange County Superior Court, in case number

10 12HM 10019, upon her plea of guilty Respondent was convicted of Second Degree Commercial

11 Burglary, violating Penal Code section 459-460(b), a misdemeanor.

12 SECOND CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

13 (Conviction of Substantially Related Crimes)

14 13. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under section 2236, in that she was

15 convicted of offenses substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a

16 physician. The circumstances are as follows:

17 14. The allegations of the First Cause for Discipline are incorporated herein by reference

18 as if fully set forth.

19 THIRD CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

20 (General Unprofessional Conduct)

21 15. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action for unprofessional conduct under section

22 2234, in that she violated multiple provisions ofthe Medical Practice Act, including section 2236.

23 The circumstances are as follows:

24 16. The allegations of the First and Second Causes for Discipline are incorporated herein

25 by reference as if fully set forth.

26 CAUSE FOR REVOCATION OF PROBATION

27 (Violation of Probationary Terms)

28 17. Respondent is subject to revocation of her probation order "In the Matter of the


1 Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation Against All a Zander," Medical Board Case No. D 1-

2 2000-108645, in that she violated Probation Condition 10, which required her to obey all laws.

3 The circumstances are set forth below.

4 18. The allegations of the First, Second, and Third Causes for Discipline are incorporated

5 herein by reference as if set forth.

6 DISCIPLINE CONSIDERATIONS

7 19. To determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on Respondent,

8 Complainant alleges that on or about October 26, 2007 "In the Matter of the Accusation and

9 Petition to Revoke Probation Against Alla Zander," Medical Board Case No. D1-2000-108645,

10 Respondent's license was revoked with revocation stayed and seven years probation imposed

11 based on multiple admitted probation violations, including one charge for trespass at an

12 Albertson's, an attempt to steal merchandise from Daisy Shoppe in Mission Viejo, California,

13 failure to comply with weekly psychotherapy requirements, failure to submit quarterly probation

14 reports, and failure to notify the Medical Board of her return to the practice of medicine. That

15 decision is now final and is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth.

16 20. To further determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on Respondent,

17 Complainant alleges that on or about March 12, 2003, Respondent attempted to steal store

18 merchandise from an Albertson's in Mission Viejo, California. On or about April22, 2003, in

19 proceedings entitled People of the State of California v. All a Zander, Orange County Superior

20 Court Case No. 03SMB1745, Respondent was charged with violating Penal Code section 610(1),

21 Trespassing. On or about June 18, 2003, Respondent was arrested by her criminal probation

22 officer for violating her probation due to the trespassing incident that occurred on March 12,

23 2003.


25 Complainant alleges that on or about December 20, 2002, "In the matter ofthe Accusation

26 Against Alla Zander," Medical Board case No. 04-2000-108645, the Respondent's license was

27 revoked with revocation stayed and five years probation imposed based on three admitted petty

28 theft convictions. That decision is now final and is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth.



2 Complainant alleges that on or about August 5, 1999, in People of the State ofCalifornia v. Alla

3 Zander, Orange County Superior Court Case No. FV99WM0706, Respondent was convicted of

4 violating Penal Code section 488, Petty Theft.


6 Complainant alleges that on or about October 21, 1999 in People of the State of California v. All a

7 Zander, Orange County Superior Court Case No. SM99SM59791, Respondent was convicted of

8 violating Penal Code section 488, Petty Theft.


10 Complainant alleges that on or about December 13, 2000, in People of the State of California v.

11 Alia Zander, Orange County Superior Court Case No. SHOOSM04959, Respondent was convicted

12 of violating Penal Code section 488, Theft with a Prior Conviction.


14 Complainant alleges that on or about October 9, 2001, in People of the State of California v. Alla

15 Zander, Orange County Superior Court Case No. SH01SM04843, Respondent was convicted of

16 violating Penal Code sections 459-460(b), General Burglary.

17

18 PRAYER

19 WHEREFORE, Complainant requests that a hearing be held on the matters herein alleged,

20 and that following the hearing, the Medical Board of California issue a decision:

21 1. Revoking or suspending Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate Number A 61985,

22 issued to Alla Zander, M.D.

23 2. Imposing the stayed discipline, i.e., revocation, "In the Matter of the Accusation and

24 Petition to Revoke Probation Against Alia Zander," Medical Board Case No. D1-2000-108645.

25 2. Revoking, suspending or denying approval of her authority to supervise physician's

26 assistants, pursuant to section 3527 of the Code;

27 Ill

28 Ill


3. If placed on probation, ordering her to pay the Medical Board of California the costs

2 of probation monitoring; and

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4. Taking such other and further action as deemed necessary and proper.

DATED: February 27, 2014

LA2013610095

Executive Director / Medical Board of California Department of Consumer Affairs State of California

Complainant


EXHIBIT 1

BEFORE THE DIVISION OF 1\ffiDICAL QUALITY

1\'IEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTl\ffiNT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

STATE OF CALIFORNIA


ALLA ZANDER, M.D.

Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate No. A 61985

Respondent

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

File No. Dl-2000-108645

_____________________________)

DECISION

The attached Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order is hereby adopted as the · Decision and Order of the Division of Medical Quality of the Medical Board of California,

Department of Consumer Affairs, State of California.

This Decision shall become effective at 5:00p.m. on October 26, 2007.

IT IS SO ORDERED September 26, 2007 .

Barbara Y aroslavs Panel B Division of Medical Quality

2

3

4

5

6

EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Attorney General of the State of California

THOMAS S. LAZAR Supervising Deputy Attorney General

RICHARD D. HENDLIN, State Bar No. 76742 Deputy Attorney General

California Department of Justice 110 West "A" Street, Suite 1100 San Diego, CA 92101

P.O. Box 85266 San Diego, CA 92186-5266

7 Telephone: (619) 645-2071 Facsimile: ( 619) 645-2061

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

Attorneys for Complainant

BEFORE THE DIVISION OF MEDICAL QUALITY

MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

STATE OF CALIFORNIA


ALLA ZANDER, M.D. 22932 Calle Azurin Mission Viejo, CA 92692

Case No. Dl-2000-108645

OAH No. L2006090715

STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AND DISCIPLINARY ORDER

17 Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate No. A 61985

18

19 Respondent.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties to the

above-entitled proceedings that the following matters are true:

PARTIES

20

21

22

23 1. Barbara Johnston (Complainant) is the Executive Director of the Medical

24 Board of California and is represented in this matter by Edmund G. Brown Jr., Attorney General

25 ofthe State of California, by Richard D. Hendlin, Deputy Attorney General.

26 Ill

27 Ill

28 Ill

2. Respondent ALLA ZANDER, M.D. (Respondent) is represented in this

2 proceeding by attorney Roger W. Calton, Esq., of the law firm of Calton and Burns, LLP, whose

3 address is 30131 Town Center Drive, Suite 177, Laguna Niguel, California 92677-2040, and

4 whose telephone number is (949) 495-9187.

5 3. On or about April 4, 1997, the Medical Board of California issued

6 Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate No. A 61985 to ALLA ZANDER, M.D. The Certificate

7 was in full force and effect at all times relevant to the charges brought in Accusation and Petition

8 to Revoke Probation No. D1-2000-108645 and OAH Case No. L2006090715 and will expire on

9 October 31, 2008, unless renewed. Respondent's Certificate No. A 61985 is currently on

10 probation under the terms of a Decision and Order in Medical Board Case No. 04-2000-108645,

11 with that probationary term set to expire on December 20, 2007. A true and correct copy of the

12 Decision and Order in Medical Board Case No. 04-2000-108645 is attached hereto as Exhibit 1

13 to Exhibit A and incorporated by reference.

14 JURISDICTION

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4. Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation No. D I -2000-108645 was

filed before the Division of Medical Quality (Division) for the Medical Board of California,

Department of Consumer Affairs, and is currently pending against Respondent. A true and

correct copy of the Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation and all other statutorily required

documents were properly served on Respondent on July 27, 2005. Respondent timely ±!led her

Notice of Defense contesting the Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation. A true and

correct copy of Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation No. Dl-2000-108645 is attached as

Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.

ADVISEMENT AND WAIVERS

5. Respondent has carefully read, discussed with counsel, and fully

understands the charges and allegations in Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation No.

D 1-2000-108645. Respondent has also carefully read, discussed with counsel, and fully

understands the effects of this Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order.

Ill

2

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

6. Respondent is fully aware of her legal rights in this matter, including the

right to a hearing on the charges and allegations in the Accusation and Petition to Revoke

Probation; the right to confront and cross-examine the witnesses against her; the right to present

evidence and to testify on her own behalf; the right to the issuance of subpoenas to compel the

attendance of witnesses and the production of documents; the right to reconsideration and court

review of an adverse decision; and all other rights accorded by the Califomia Administrative

Procedure Act and other applicable laws.

7. Respondent voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waives and gives up

each and every right set forth above.

CULPABILITY

8. Respondent admits the truth of each and every charge and allegation in

Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation No. Dl-2000-108645.

9. Respondent agrees that her Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate No.

A61985 is subject to discipline and she agrees to be bound by the Division of Medical Quality

(Division) 's imposition of discipline as set forth in the Disciplinary Order below.

RESERVATION

10. The admissions made by Respondent herein are only for the purposes of

this proceeding, or any other proceedings in which the Division of Medical Quality, Medical

Board of California, or other professional licensing agency is involved, and shall not be

admissible in any other criminal or civil proceeding.

CONTINGENCY

11 . This stipulation shall be subject to approval by the Division of Medical

Quality. Respondent understands and agrees that counsel for Complainant and the staff of the

Medical Board of California may communicate directly with the Division regarding this

stipulation and settlement, without notice to or participation by Respondent or her counsel. By

signing the stipulation, Respondent understands and agrees that she may not withdraw her

agreement or seek to rescind the stipulation prior to the time the Division considers and acts upon

it. If the Division fails to adopt this stipulation as its Decision and Order, the Stipulated

3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Settlement and Disciplinary Order shall be of no force or effect, except for this paragraph, it shall

be inadmissible in any legal action between the parties, and the Division shall not be disqualified

from further action by having considered this matter.

OTHER MA TIERS

12. This Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order is intended by the

parties herein to be an integrated writing representing the complete, final and exclusive

embodiment of the agreements of the parties in the above-entitled matter.

13. The parties understand and agree that facsimile copies of this Stipulated

Settlement and Disciplinary Order, including facsimile signatures thereto, shall have the same

force and effect as the originals.

14. Any term or provision of this Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order

12 which is found to be invalid or unenforceable shall be ineffective only to the extent of such

13 invalidity or unenforceability without rendering invalid or unenforceable the remaining terms and

14 provisions of this Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order. lf any provision of this

15 Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order is found to be so broad as to be unenforceable, such

16 provision shall be interpreted, if possible, to be only as broad as is enforceable.

17 15. In consideration of the foregoing admissions and stipulations, the parties

18 agree that the Division may, without further notice or formal proceeding, issue and enter the

19 following Disciplinary Order:

20 DISCIPLINARY ORDER

21 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate

22 No. A 61985 issued to Respondent ALLA ZANDER, M.D. (Respondent) is revoked. However,

23 the revocation is stayed and Respondent is placed on probation for seven (7) years beginning on

24 effective date of this Decision, on the following terms and conditions.

25 1. This Disciplinary Order supercedes the "Decision and Order" in Medical

26 Board Case No. 04-2000-108645, including its terms and conditions of probation.

27 2. COMMUNITY SERVICE- FREE SERVICES Within 60 calendar days

28 of the effective date of this Decision, respondent shall submit to the Division or its designee for

4

-----~---------·----·-

-----~--------------------------

prior approval a community service plan in which respondent shall, during each of the first two

2 years of probation, provide 120 hours per year of free medical and/or nonmedical services to a

3 community or non-profit organization.

4 Prior to engaging in any community service, respondent shall provide a true copy

5 of the Decision(s) to the chief of staff, director, office manager, program manager, officer, or the

6 chief executive officer at every community or non-profit organization where respondent provides

7 community service and shall submit proof of compliance to the Division or its designee within

8 15 calendar days. This condition shall also apply to any change(s) in community service.

9 Community service performed prior to the effective date of the Decision shall not

10 be accepted in fulfillment of this condition.

11 3. ETHICS COURSE Within 60 calendar days of the effective date of this

12 Decision, respondent shall enroll in a course in ethics, at respondent's expense, approved in

13 advance by the Division or its designee. Failure to successfully complete the course during the

14 first year of probation is a violation of probation.

15 An ethics course taken after the acts that gave rise to the charges in the

16 Accusation, but prior to the effective date of the Decision may, in the sole discretion of the

17 Division or its designee, be accepted towards the fulfillment of this condition if the course would

18 have been approved by the Division or its designee had the course been taken after the effective

19 date of this Decision.

20 Respondent shall submit a certification of successful completion to the Division

21 or its designee not later than 15 calendar days after successfully completing the course, or not

22 later than 15 calendar days after the effective date of the Decision, whichever is later.

23 4. PSYCHOTHERAPY Within 60 calendar days of the effective date of this

24 Decision, respondent shall submit to the Division or its designee for prior approval the name and

25 qualifications of a board certified psychiatrist or a licensed psychologist who has a doctoral

26 degree in psychology and at least five years of postgraduate experience in the diagnosis and

27 treatment of emotional and mental disorders. Upon approval, respondent shall undergo and

28 ///

5

1 continue treatment, including any modifications to the frequency of psychotherapy, until the

2 Division or its designee deems that no further psychotherapy is necessary.

3 The psychotherapist shall consider any information provided by the Division or its

4 designee and any other information the psychotherapist deems relevant and shall furnish a written

5 evaluation report to the Division or its designee. Respondent shall cooperate in providing the

6 psychotherapist any information and documents that the psychotherapist may deem pertinent.

7 Respondent shall have the treating psychotherapist submit quarterly status reports to the Division

8 or its designee. The Division or its designee may require respondent to undergo psychiatric

9 evaluations by a Division-appointed board certified psychiatrist.

10 If, prior to the completion of probation, respondent is found to be mentally unfit to

11 resume the practice of medicine without restrictions, the Division shall retain continuing

12 jurisdiction over respondent's license, and the period of probation shall be extended until the

13 Division determines that respondent is mentally fit to resume the practice of medicine without

14 restrictions. Respondent shall pay the cost of all psychotherapy and psychiatric evaluations.

15 Failure to undergo and continue psychotherapy treatment, or comply with any

16 required modification in the frequency of psychotherapy, is a violation of probation.

17 5. NO SOLO PRACTICE Respondent is prohibited from engaging in the

18 solo practice of medicine.

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

6. NOTIFICATION OF ARREST FOR THEFT-RELATED CRIMES In the

event that respondent is arrested by any law enforcement agency for any shoplifting or theft

related crime during probation she shall promptly, and in no event later than 48 hours after any

such arrest, notify in writing the Division or its designee of such arrest. Failure to so notify the

Division or its designee will, by itself, constitute a violation of probation.

7. SUSPENSION OF LICENSE UPON ARREST Within 72 hours ofbeing

notified in writing by the Division or its designee following any arrest of respondent for any

shoplifting or other theft-related crime during probation, respondent shall immediately cease

practicing medicine and shall remain suspended from the practice of medicine until the

conclusion of any criminal prosecution, and/or the issuance of a final Decision and Order by the

6

Division of Medical Quality on any Accusation and/or Petition to Revoke Probation based in

2 whole, or in part, upon any such arrest. During any such suspension period, Respondent's

3 Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate No. A 61985 shall be suspended and she shall be

4 prohibited from practicing medicine in the State of California.

5 Respondent hereby voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently, and with the benefit

6 of the advise of counsel, waives all rights accorded to her under Government Code section 11529

7 and any right to a prompt post-deprivation hearing regarding the suspension ofher Physician's

8 and Surgeon's Certificate No. A 61985 under this condition.

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

8. NOTIFICATION Prior to engaging in the practice of medicine, the

respondent shall provide a true copy of the Decision(s) and Accusation(s) to the Chief of Staff or

the Chief Executive Officer at every hospital where privileges or membership are extended to

respondent, at any other facility where respondent engages in the practice of medicine, including

all physician and locum tenens registries or other similar agencies, and to the Chief Executive

Officer at every insurance carrier which extends malpractice insurance coverage to respondent.

Respondent shall submit proof of compliance to the Division or its designee within 15 calendar

days.

This condition shall apply to any change(s) in hospitals, other facilities or

' . msurance earner.

9. SUPERVISION OF PHYSICIAN ASSISTANTS During probation,

20 respondent is prohibited from supervising physician assistants.

21 10. OBEY ALL LAWS Respondent shall obey all federal, state and local

22 laws, all rules governing the practice of medicine in California, and remain in full compliance

23 with any court ordered criminal probation, payments and other orders.

24 11. QUARTERLY DECLARATIONS Respondent shall submit quarterly

25 declarations under penalty of perjury on forms provided by the Division, stating whether there

26 has been compliance with all the conditions of probation. Respondent shall submit quarterly

27 declarations not later than I 0 calendar days after the end of the preceding quarter.

28 ///

7

12. PROBATION UNIT COMPLIANCE Respondent shall comply with the

2 Division's probation unit. Respondent shall, at all times, keep the Division informed of

3 respondent's business and residence addresses. Changes of such addresses shall be immediately

4 communicated in writing to the Division or its designee. Under no circumstances shall a post

5 office box serve as an address of record, except as allowed by Business and Professions Code

6 section 2021 (b).

7 Respondent shall not engage in the practice of medicine in respondent's place of

8 residence. Respondent shall maintain a current and renewed California physician's and

9 surgeon's license.

10 Respondent shall immediately inform the Division, or its designee, in writing, of

11 travel to any areas outside the jurisdiction of California which lasts, or is contemplated to last,

12 more than 30 calendar days.

13 13. INTERVIEW WITH THE DIVISION, OR ITS DESIGNEE Respondent

14 shall be available in person for interviews either at respondent's place ofbusiness or at the

15 probation unit office, with the Division or its designee, upon request at various intervals, and

16 either with or without prior notice throughout the term of probation.

17 14. RESIDING OR PRACTICING OUT-OF-STATE In the event respondent

18 should leave the State of California to reside or to practice, respondent shall notify the Division

19 or its designee in writing 30 calendar days prior to the dates of departure and return. Non-

20 practice is defined as any period oftime exceeding 30 calendar days in which respondent is not

21 engaging in any activities defined in Sections 2051 and 2052 ofthe Business and Professions

22 Code.

23 All time spent in an intensive training program outside the State of California

24 which has been approved by the Division or its designee shall be considered as time spent in the

25 practice of medicine within the State. A Board-ordered suspension of practice shall not be

26 considered as a period of non-practice. Periods of temporary or permanent residence or practice

27 outside California will not apply to the reduction of the probationary term. Periods of temporary

28 Ill

8

----------------~~---- -------------------------

or permanent residence or practice outside California will relieve respondent of the responsibility

2 to comply with the probationary terms and conditions with the exception of this condition and

3 the following terms and conditions ofprobation: Obey All Laws; Probation Unit Compliance;

4 and Cost Recovery.

5 Respondent's license shall be automatically cancelled if respondent's periods of

6 temporary or permanent residence or practice outside California total two years. However,

7 respondent's license shall not be cancelled as long as respondent is residing and practicing

8 medicine in another state of the United States and is on active probation with the medical

9 licensing authority of that state, in which case the two year period shall begin on the date

10 probation is completed or terminated in that state.

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

15. FAILURE TO PRACTICE MEDICINE- CALIFORNIA RESIDENT

In the event respondent resides in the State of California and for any reason

respondent stops practicing medicine in California, respondent shall notify the Division or its

designee in writing within 30 calendar days prior to the dates of non-practice and return to

practice. Any period of non-practice within California, as defined in this condition, will not

apply to the reduction of the probationary term and does not relieve respondent of the

responsibility to comply with the terms and conditions of probation. Non-practice is defined as

any period of time exceeding 30 calendar days in which respondent is not engaging in any

activities defined in sections 2051 and 2052 of the Business and Professions Code.

All time spent in an intensive training program which has been approved by the

Division or its designee shall be considered time spent in the practice of medicine. For purposes

of this condition, non-practice due to a Board-ordered suspension or in compliance with any

other condition of probation, shall not be considered a period of non-practice.

Respondent's license shall be automatically cancelled if respondent resides in

California and for a total of two years, fails to engage in California in any of the activities

described in Business and Professions Code sections 2051 and 2052.

16. COMPLETION OF PROBATION Respondent shall comply with all

financial obligations (e.g., probation costs) not later than 120 calendar days prior to the

9

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

completion of probation. Upon successful completion of probation, respondent's certificate shall

be fully restored.

17. VIOLATION OF PROBATION Failure to fully comply with any term or

condition of probation is a violation of probation. If respondent violates probation in any respect,

the Division, after giving respondent notice and the opportunity to be heard, may revoke

probation and carry out the disciplinary order that was stayed. If an Accusation, Petition to

Revoke Probation, or an Interim Suspension Order is filed against respondent during probation,

the Division shall have continuing jurisdiction until the matter is final, and the period of

probation shall be extended until the matter is final.

18. LICENSE SURRENDER Following the effective date of this Decision, if

respondent ceases practicing due to retirement, health reasons or is otherwise unable to satisfy

the terms and conditions of probation, respondent may request the voluntary surrender of

respondent's license. The Division reserves the right to evaluate respondent's request and to

exercise its discretion whether or not to grant the request, or to take any other action deemed

appropriate and reasonable under the circumstances. Upon formal acceptance of the surrender,

respondent shall within 15 calendar days deliver respondent's wallet and wall certificate to the

Division or its designee and respondent shall no longer practice medicine. Respondent will no

longer be subject to the terms and conditions of probation and the surrender of respondent's

license shall be deemed disciplinary action. If respondent re-applies for a medical license, the

application shall be treated as a petition for reinstatement of a revoked certificate.

19. PROBATION MONITORING COSTS Respondent shall pay the costs

associated with probation monitoring each and every year of probation, as designated by the

Division, which costs may be adjusted on an annual basis. Such costs shall be payable to the

Medical Board of California and delivered to the Division or its designee no later than January

31 of each calendar year. Failure to pay costs within 30 calendar days of the due date is a

violation of probation.

Ill

I I I

10

08/01/2007 15:17 DePt. of Justice~ 919494959187 ND.682 [;1012

ACCEPTANCE 1

2 I have carefully read the above Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order and

3 have fully discussed it with my attomey1 Roger W. Calton, Esq. I understand the stipulation and

4 the effect it will have on my Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate. I enter into this Stipul~ted

5 Settlement and Disciplinary-Order vohm.tarily, knowingly, and intelligently, and agree to be

6 bound by the Decision and Order of the Division of Medical Quality, Medical Board of

7 California.

8 DATED: _.!:__tJ £:;:......._tJ_:.._f._. 0__,:.._7 __

9

10

11

12

ALLA~l~J¢: Respondent ·

I have read and fully discussed with Respondent ALLA ZANDER, M.D. the terms

13 and conditions and other matters contained in the above Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary

14 Order. I approve its fonn-w.d content.

15 DATED: rl/6 7 I I

16

17

18 W. CALTON1 ESQ.

Attorney for Respondent ·

19

20 Ill

21 Ill

22 Ill

23 Ill

24 1/1

25 Ill

26 Ill

27 Ill

28 Ill

11

ENDORSEMENT

2 The foregoing Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order is hereby respectfully

3 submitted for consideration by the Division of Medical Quality, Medical Board of California of

4 the Department of Consumer Affairs.

5

6 DATED: ~~tUr~ 1 "JooJ

7 EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Attorney General of the State of California

8 THOMAS S. LAZAR Supervising Deputy Attorney General

~~J}.~~~ RICHARD D. HENDLIN ~ Deputy Attorney General


12

Exhibit A

Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation No. Dl-2000-108645

BILL LOCKYER, Attorney General of the State of California

2 SANFORD H. FELDMAN, State Bar No. 47775 Deputy Attorney General

3 California Department of Justice 110 West "A" Street, Suite 1100

4 San Diego, CA 92101

5 P.O. Box 85266 San Diego, CA 92186-5266

6 Telephone: (619) 645-2079 Facsimile: (619) 645-2061

7 Attorneys for Complainant

8

FILED STATE OF CALIFORNIA

MEDICAL BOARD Of CALIFORNIA

SA~NTO~~ BY ~&44 · LVST

BEFORE THE 9

10

11

DIVISION OF MEDICAL QUALITY MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA


12 In the Matter of the Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation Against:

13 ALLA ZANDER, M.D.

14 22932 Calle Azurin Mission Viejo, CA 92692

15 Physician's and Surgeon's

16 Certificate No. A 61985

17

18

19 Complainant alleges:

20

Respondent.

PARTIES

Case No. Dl-2000-108645

OAHNo.

ACCUSATION AND PETITION TO REVOKE PROBATION

21 1. David T. Thornton (Complainant) brings this Accusation and Petition to

22 Revoke Probation solely in his official capacity as the Executive Director of the Medical Board

23 of California, Department of Consumer Affairs.

24 2. On or about April4, 1997, the Medical Board of California issued

25 Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate No. A 619S5·to ALLA ZANDER, M.D. (Respondent). The

26 Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate was in full force and effect at all times relevant to the

27 charges brought herein and will expire on October 31, 2006, unless renewed.

28 ///

1

2 3.

JURISDICTION

This Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation is brought before the

3 Division of Medical Quality (Division) for the Medical Board of California, Department of

4 Consumer Affairs, under the authority of the following laws and the Decision and Order "In the

5 Matter of the Accusation against Alia Zander," Medical Board Case No. 04-2000-108645, a copy

6 of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. All section references are to the Business and

7 Professions Code unless otherwise indicated.

8 4. Section 2227 of the Code provides that a licensee who is found guilty

9 under the Medical Practice Act may have his or her license revoked, suspended for a period not

10 to exceed one year, placed on probation and required to pay the costs of probation monitoring, or

11 such other action taken in relation to discipline as the Division deems proper.

12 5. Section 2234 of the Code states:

13 "The Division of Medical Quality shall take action against any licensee who is

14 charged with unprofessional conduct. In addition to other provisions of this article,

15 unprofessional conduct includes, but is not limited to, the following:

16 "(a) Violating or atte~pting to violate, directly or indirectly, assisting in or

17 abetting the violation of, or conspiring to violate any provision of this chapter [Chapter 5,

18 the Medical Practice Act].

19 "(b) Gross negligence.

20 "(c) Repeated negligent acts. To be repeated, there must be two or more

21 negligent acts or omissions. An initial negligent act or omission followed by a separate

22 and distinct departure from the applicable standard of care shall constitute repeated

23 negligent acts.

24 "(1) An initial negligent diagnosis followed by an act or omission medically

25 appropriate for that negligent diagnosis of the patient shall constitute a single negligent

26 act.

27 "(2) When the standard of care requires a change in the diagnosis, act, or

28 omission that constitutes the negligent act described in paragraph (1 ), including, but not

2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

limited to, a reevaluation of the diagnosis or a change in treatment, and the licensee's

conduct departs from the applicable standard of care, each departure constitutes a separate

and distinct breach of the standard of care.

"(d) Incompetence.

"(e) The commission of any act involving dishonesty or corruption which is

substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon.

"(f) Any action or conduct which would have warranted the denial of a

certificate."

"(g)." .. "

6. Section 2236 of the Code states:

"(a) The conviction of any offense substantially related to the qualifications,

functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon constitutes unprofessional conduct within

the meaning of this chapter [Chapter 5, the Medical Practice Act]. The record of

conviction shall be conclusive evidence only of the fact that the conviction occurred.

"(b) The district attorney, city attorney, or other prosecuting agency shall notify

the Division of Medical' Quality of the pendency of an action against a licensee charging a

felony or misdemeanor immediately upon obtaining information that the defendant is a

licensee. The notice shall identify the licensee and describe the crimes charged and the

facts alleged. The prosecuting agency shall also notify the clerk of the court in which the

action is pending that the defendant is a licensee, and the clerk shall record prominently

in the file that the defendant holds a license as a physician and surgeon.

"(c) The clerk of the court in which a licensee is convicted of a crime shall,

within 48 hours after the conviction, transmit a certified copy of the record of conviction

to the board. The division may inquire into the circumstances surrounding the

commission of a crime in order to fix the degree of discipline or to determine if the

conviction is of an offense substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties

of a physician and surgeon.

Ill

3

,r

1 "(d) A plea or verdict of guilty or a conviction after a plea of nolo contendere is

2 deemed to be a conviction within the meaning of this section and Section 2236.1. The

3 record of conviction shall be conclusive evidence of the fact that the conviction

4 occurred."

5 7. Section 2261 of the Code states:

6 "Knowingly making or signing any certificate or other document directly or

7 indirectly related to the practice of medicine or podiatry which falsely represents the

8 existence or nonexistence of a state of facts, constitutes unprofessional conduct."

9 8. Section 125.3 of the Code provides, in pertinent part, that the Division

10 may request the administrative law judge to direct a licentiate found to have committed a

11 violation or violations of the licensing act to pay a sum not to exceed the reasonable costs of the

12 investigation and enforcement of the case.

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

part:

9. Section 14124.12 ofthe Welfare and Institutions Code states, in pertinent

"(a) Upon receipt of written notice from the Medical Board of California, the

Osteopathic Medical Board of California, or the Board of Dental Exillniners of California,

that a licensee's license has been placed on probation as a result of a disciplinary action,

the department may not reimburse any Medi-Cal claim for the type of surgical service or

invasive procedure that gave rise to the probation, including any dental surgery or

invasive procedure, that was performed by the licensee on or after the effective date of

· probation and until the termination of all probationary terms and conditions or until the

probationary period has ended, whichever occurs first. This section shall apply except in

any case in which the relevant licensing board detennines that compelling circumstances

warrant the continued reimbursement during the probationary period of any Medi-Cal

claim, including any claim for dental services, as so described. In such a case, the

department shall continue to reimburse the licensee for all procedlires, except for those

invasive or surgical procedures for which the licensee was placed on probation."

Ill

4

1

2

3 10.

FIRST CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

(Dishonesty or Corruption)

Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under Code section 2234(e) in

4 that she committed acts of dishonesty or corruption substantially related to the qualifications,

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

functions or duties of a physician and surgeon. The facts are set forth below.

11. On or about October 9, 2001, respondent was placed on three-years

criminal probation in "People ofthe State of California v. Alla Zander," Orange County Superior

Court Case No. SH01SM04834. As a condition of her criminal probation, respondent was

ordered to obey all laws.

12. On or about December 20, 2002, a Decision and Order "In the Matter of

the Accusation against Alia Zander," Medical Board Case No. 04-2000-108645, became

effective. Condition 4 of the Order requires respondent to undergo and continue psychotherapy

as ordered by the Division or its designee. Condition 5 of the Order requires that respondent

comply with all laws and remain in full compliance with any court ordered probation. Condition

6 of the Order requires that respondent file quarterly reports with the Division or its designee.

Condition 9 of the Order requires respondent notify the-Division within 10 days of stopping the

practicing medicine and within 10 days of returning to the practice of medicine.

13. On or about February 23, 2003, respondent, pursuant to Condition 4, was

instructed to have weekly psychotherapy sessions.

14. On or about March 12, 2003, respondent attempted to steal store

merchandise from an Albertson's in Mission Viejo, California. Respondent was cited for

tre$passing since previously she had been ordered not to enter the store because of other

shoplifting attempts at the store. Respondent's conduct violated state law, her criminal probation

and Condition 5.

15. On or about March 29, 2003, respondent completed and later submitted a

quarterly probation report in which she falsely stated she had complied with all terms and

conditions of her Board probation during the quarter ending March 31, 2003. In fact, as

Ill

5

described in paragraph 14, above, on or about March 12, 2003, respondent committed a violation

2 of state law, failed to comply with her criminal probation and violated Condition 5.

3 16. On or about April22, 2003, in "People of the State of California v. Alla

4 Zander," Orange County Superior Court Case No. 03SMB1745, respondent was charged with

5 trespassing on March 12, 2003, in violation of Penal Code section 610(1).

6 17. On or about June 18, 2003, respondent was arrested by her criminal

7 probation officer for violating her probation. The arrest by the probation officer was based on

8 the March 12, 2003 trespass incident.

9 18. On or about June 28, 2003, respondent completed and later submitted a

10 quarterly probation report in which she falsely stated she had not been arrested or charged with a

11 crime during the quarter ending June 30, 2003. In fact, on or about April22, 2003, respondent

12 had been charged with criminal trespass. In addition, on or about June 18, 2003, respondent had

13 been arrested for violating her criminal probation.

14 19. On or about December 16, 2003, respondent admitted she violated her

15 criminal probation in Orange County Superior Court Case No. SH01SM04834. As a result, her . -

16 criminal probation was extended to December 16,2008. In addition, her criminal probation

17 conditions were modified to prevent her from entering any grocery store and entering any other·

18 store with a purse or bag larger than six inches and/or while wearing a coat with pockets. In

19 addition, she was order, as a condition of probation, to continue counseling and therapy as

20 required by the Medical Board.

21 20. On or about April 11, 2004, respondent completed and later submitted a

22 quarterly probation report in which she falsely stated she had complied with all terms and

23 conditions of her Board probation during the quarter ending March 31, 2004. In fact, during the

24 quarter, respondent failed to see her treating psychotherapist on a weekly basis in violation of

25 Condition 4.

26 21. On or about July 6, 2004, respondent completed and later submitted a

27 quarterly probation report in which she falsely stated she had complied with all terms and

28 conditions of her Board probation during the quarter ending June 30, 2004. In fact, during the

6

1 quarter, respondent failed to see her treating psychotherapist on a weekly basis in violation of

2 Condition 4.

3 22. On or about July 25, 2004, respondent attempted to steal earrings and a

4 necklace from the Daisy Shoppe in Mission Viejo, California.

5 SECOND CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

6 (False Record Related to the Practice of Medicine)

7 23. Respondent is further subject to disciplinary action under Code section

8 2261 in that she created false records related, directly or indirectly, to the practice of medicine as

9 set forth in paragraphs 15, 18, 20 and 21 above, which are incorporated herein by reference as if

10 fully set forth.

11 THIRD CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

12 (General Unprofessional Conduct)

13 24. Respondent is further subject to disciplinary action under Code section

14 2234 in that she engaged in acts ofgeneral unprofessional condud as set forth in paragraphs 14,

15 15, 18-22 and 25-32, which are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth.

16 CAUSE FOR REVOCATION

17 (Violation ofProbation)

18 25. Respondent is subject to revocation of probation "In the Matter of the

19 Accusation against Alla Zander," Medical Board Case No. 04-2000-108645, in that she violated

20 Probation Conditions 4 and 5. The circumstances are set forth below.

21 26. Paragraphs 11-24 above are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set

22 forth.

23 27. On or about February 18, 2003 to on or about April29, 2003, respondent

24 failed to undergo weekly psychotherapy in violation of Probation Condition 4.

25

26

27

28

1. Unprofessional conduct has been defined as conduct which breaches the rules or ethical code of the medical profession, or conduct which is unbecoming a member in good standing of the medical profession, and which demonstrates an unfitness to practice medicine. Shea v. Board of Medical Examiners, (1978) 81 Cal.App.3d 564,575.

7

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

28. From on or about July 1, 2004 to on or about July 27, 2004, respondent

failed to undergo weekly psychotherapy in violation of Condition 4 and her criminal probation.

29. During the quarter ending March 31, 2004, respondent failed to undergo

weekly psychotherapy in violation of Condition 4 and her criminal probation.

30. On or about January 10, 2005, respondent failed to submit a quarterly

probation report in violation of Condition 6.

31. On or about January 16, 2005, respondent failed to notify the Division or

its designee that she had returned to the practice of medicine on January 6, 2005, following her

period of non-practice that began on or about the end of July 2004.

10 32. On or about April 10, 2005, respondent failed to submit a quarterly

11 probation report.

12

13 33.

DISCIPLINE CONSIDERATIONS

To determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on respondent,

14 Complainant alleges that on or about December 20, 2002 "In the Matter of the Accusation

15 against Alla Zander," Medical Board Case No. 04-2000-108645, respondent's license was

16 revoked with revocation stayed and five-years probation imposed based on three admitted petty

17 theft convictions substantially related to the qualifications, functions or duties of a physician and

18 surgeon. Terms and conditions of probation included an actual suspension of20 days and a

19 requirement she obey all laws. That decision is now final and is incorporated by reference as if

20 fully set forth.

21 34. ·To further determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on

22 respondent, Complainant alleges that on or about July 20, 1999 in "People ofthe State of

23 California, Orange County Case No. 99SM59791, respondent was convicted of violating Penal

24 Code sections 666/488, theft with a prior conviction. Respondent was sentenced to three years

25 probation with terms and conditions including 500 hours of community service and that she

26 violate no laws. On or about February 17, 2000, respondent's probation was revoke for failure to

27 file proof of having complied with her book and release order. On February 24, 2000,

28 respondent's probation was reinstated. On or about August 28, 2000, respondent's probation was

8

1 again revoked based on her July 28, 2000 arrest for theft. On or about December 13, 2000,

2 respondent's probation was reinstated and modified. On or about October 9, 2001, respondent's

3 probation was revoked based on her September 10, 2001 arrest for theft. On or about March 13,

4 2002, respondent's probation was reinstated and modified. On or about May 22, 3003,

5 respondent's probation was revoked based on March 12, 2003 arrest for trespassing. On or about

6 December 16, 2003, respondent's probation was reinstated and modified to include a requirement

7 that she continue counseling and therapy as required by the Medical Board and to impose 180

8 days in jail; however, the jail sentence was stayed pending completion of probation in

9 respondent's other criminal cases. In addition, her probation was extended to December 16,

10 2008. The record of the criminal proceeding is incorporated as if fully set forth.

11 35. To further determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on

12 Respondent, Complainant alleges that on or about December 13, 2000, in "People ofthe State of

l3 California, Orange County Case No. OOSM04959, respondent was convicted of violating Penal

14 Code sections 666/488, theft with a prior conviction. Respondent was sentenced to three years

15 probation with terms and conditions including 60 days custody, to be served on weekends, and an

16 order she violate no laws. On or about October 9, 2001, respondent's probation was revoked

17 based on her September 10, 2001 arrest for theft. On or about March 13, 2002,respondent's

18 probation was reinstated and modified. On or about May 22, 3003, respondent's probation was

19 revoked based on March 12, 2003 arrest for trespassing. On or about December 16, 2003,

20 respondent's probation was reinstated and modified to include a requirement that she continue

21 counseling and therapy as required by the Medical Board and to impose 180 days in jail;

22 however, the jail sentence was stayed pending completion of probation in respondent's other

23 criminal cases. In addition, her probation was extended to December 16, 2008. On August 20,

24 2004, respondent's probation was revoked based on her July 25, 2004 theft arrest. Respondent

25 was allowed to remain free on $25,000 bond. Respondent has yet to be sentenced for her most

26 recent probation violation. The record of the criminal proceeding is incorporated a..c; if fully set

27 forth.

28 Ill

9

1 36. To further determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on

2 Respondent, Complainant alleges that on or about October 9, 2001, "People ofthe State of

3 California, Orange County Case No. 01SM04843, respondent was convicted of violating Penal

4 Code sections 459-460(B), general burglary. Respondent was sentenced to three years probation

5 with terms and conditions including 15 days custody and that she obey all laws. On or about

6 May 22, 3003, respondent's probation was revoked based on March 12, 2003 arrest for

7 trespassing. On or about December 16, 2003, respondent's probation was reinstated and

8 modified to include a requirement that she continue counseling and therapy as required by the

9 Medical Board and to impose 180 days in jail; however, the jail sentence was stayed pending

10 completion of probation in respondent's other criminal cases. In addition, her probation was

11 extended to December 16, 2008. On August 20,2004, respondent's probation was revoked

12 based on her July 25, 2004 theft arrest. Respondent was allowed to remain free on $25,000 bond.

13 Respondent has yet to be sentenced for her most recent probation violation. The record ofthe

14 criminal proceeding is incorporated as if fully set forth.

15 PRAYER

16 WHEREFORE, Complainant requests that a hearing be held on the matters herein

17 alleged, and that following the hearing, the Division of Medical Quality issue a decision:

18 1. Revoking or suspending Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate No.

19 A 61985, issued to ALLA ZANDER, M.D.;

20 2. Imposing the stayed discipline, i.e., revocation, from ''In the Matter of the

21 Accusation against AHa Zander," Medical Board Case No. 04-2000-108645;

22 3. Revoking, suspending or denying approval of Alla Zander, M.D.'s

23 authority to supervise physician's assistants, pursuant to section 3527 of the Code;

24 4. Ordering Alia Zander, M.D. to pay the Division of Medical Quality the

25 reasonable costs of the investigation and enforcement of this case, and, if placed on probation,

26 the costs of probation monitoring; and,

27 Ill

28 ///

10

1

2

3

4

.5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

5.

DATED:

SD20057007 61

70031057.wpd

------ -----

Taking such other and further action as deemed necessary and proper.

July 27, 2005

J)~~ DAVID T. THORNTON Executive Director Medical Board of California Department of Consumer Affairs State of California Complainant

11

EXHIBIT 1

DECISION AND ORDER

·-----------------·· ···~-·----·

BEFORE THE DIVISION OF IHEDICAL QUALITY


STATE OF CALIFORNIA


) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

ALLA ZANDER, M.D.

Physiciun's and Surgeon's Certificate #A-61985

Case No: 04-2000-108645

Respondent. )

DECISION AND ORDER

The attached Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order is hereby accepted and adopted as the Decision and Order by the Division of Medical Quality of the Medical Board of California, Department of Consumer Affairs, State of California.

This Decision shall become effective at 5:00p.m. on December 20. 2002

IT IS SO ORDERED November 20, 2002

MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA

(G!e~ Ronald Wender, M.D. Chair of Panel B Division of Medical Quality

-----------·. - .. ------ ------ -

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

BILL LOCKYER. Attorney General of the State of California

JOHN E. RITIMA YER., State Bar No. 67291 Deputy Attorney General

California Department of Justice 3 00 So. Spring Street, Suite 1702 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Telephone: (213) 897-7485 Facsimile: (213) 897-1071


BEFORE THE DIVISION OF MEDICAL QUALITY


STATE OF CALIFORNIA

In the Matter of the First Amended Accusation 11 Against:

Case No. 04-2000-108645

12 ALLA ZANDER, M.D. 22932 Calle Azurin

OAH No. L-2002020576

STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AND DISCIPLINARY ORDER 13 Mission Viejo, CA 92692

14 Physician's & Surgeon's Certificate No. A 61985

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

Respondent.

In the interest of a prompt and speedy settlement of this matter, consistent with

the public interest and the responsibility of the Division of Medical Quality, Medical Board of

California of the Department of Consumer Affairs, the parties hereby agree to the following

Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order which will be submitted to the Division for

approval and adoption as the final disposition of the First Amended Accusation.

PARTIES

1. Ron Joseph (Complainant) is the Executive Director of the Medical Board

24 of California. He brought this action solely in his official capacity and is represented in this

25 matter by Bill Lockyer, Attorney General of the State of California, by John E. Rittmayer,

26 Deputy Attorney General.

27 2. Respondent Alia Zander, M.D. (Respondent) is represented in this

28 proceeding by attorney Robert K. Weinberg, whose address is 18201 Von Kannan Ave., Suite

1

1160, Irvine, CA 92612.

2 3. On or about April4, 1997, the Medical Board ofCa1ifornia issued

3 Physician's & Surgeon's Cenificate No. A 61985 to Respondent. The Cenificate was in full

4 force and effect at all times relevant to the charges brought in First Amended Accusation No.

5 04-2000-108645 and will expire on October 31, 2002, unless renewed.

6 JURISDICTION

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4. First Amended Accusation No. 04-2000-108645 was filed before the

Division of Medical Quality (Division) for the Medical Board of California, Department of

Consumer Affairs, and is currently pending against Respondent. The First Amended Accusation

and all other statutorily required documents were properly served on Respondent on February 25,

2002. Respondent timely filed her Notice of Defense contesting the First Amended Accusation.

A copy of First Amended Accusation No. 04-2000-108645 is attached as exhibit A and

incorporated herein by reference.

ADVISEMENT AND WAIVERS

5. Respondent has carefully read, fully discussed with counsel, and

understands the charges and allegations in First .Amended Accusation No. 04-2000-108645.

Respondent has also carefully read, fully discussed \Vitti counsel, and understands the effects of

this Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order.

6. Respondent is fully aware of her legal rights in this matter, including the

right to a hearing on the charges and allegations in the First .Amended Accusation; the right to be

represented by counsel at her own expense; the right to confront and cross-examine the witnesses

against her; the right to present evidence and to testify on her own behalf; the right to the

issuance of subpoenas to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents;

the right to reconsideration and court review of an adverse decision; and all other rights accorded

by the California Administrative Procedure Act and other applicable laws.

7. Respondent voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waives and gives up

each and every right set forth above.

2

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

CULPABILITY

8. Respondent admits the truth of each and every charge and allegation in

paragraphs 26 through 33, inclusive, of the First Amended Accusation No. 04-2000-108645.

9. Respondent agrees that her Physician & Surgeon Certificate is subject to

discipline and she agrees to be bound by the Division's imposition of discipline as set forth in the

Disciplinary Order below.

CONTINGENCY

10. This stipulation shall be subject to approval by the Division of Medical

9 Quality. Respondent understands and agrees that counsel for Complainant and the staff of the

I 0 Medical Board of California may communicate directly with the Division regarding this

11 stipulation and settlement, without notice to or participation by Respondent or her counsel. By

12 signing the stipulation, Respondent understands and agrees that she may not withdraw her

13 agreement or seek to rescind the stipulation prior to the time the Division considers and acts

14 upon it. If the Division fails to adopt this stipulation as its Decision and Order, the Stipulated

15 Settlement and Disciplinary Order shall be of no force or effect, except for this paragraph, it shall

16 be inadmissible in any legal action between the parties, and the Division shall not be disqualified

17 from further action by having considered this matter.

18 11. The parties understand and agree that facsimile copies of this Stipulated

19 Settl~ment and Disciplinary Order, including facsimile signatures thereto, shall have the same

20 force and effect as the originals.

21 12. In consideration of the foregoing admissions and stipulations, the parties

22 agree that the Division may, without further notice or formal proceeding, issue and enter the

23 following Disciplinary Order:

24 DISCIPLINARY ORDER

25 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Physician's & Surgeon's Certificate No. A

26 61985 issued to Respondent Alia Zander, M.D. is revoked. However, the revocation is stayed

27 and Respondent is placed on probation for five (5) years on the following terms and conditions.

28 Within 15 days after the effective date of this decision the respondent shall

3

provide the Division, or its designee, proof of service that respondent has served a true copy of

2 this decision on the Chief of Staff or the Chief Executive Officer at every hospital where

3 privileges or membership are extended to respondent or at any other facility where respondent

4 engages in the practice of medicine and on the Chief Executive Officer at every insurance carrier

5 where malpractice insurance coverage is extended to respondent.

6 1. ACTUAL SUSPENSION As part of probation, respondent is suspended

7 from the practice of medicine for 20 days beginning the sixteenth (16th) day after the effective

8 date of this decision.

9 2. ETHICS COURSE Within sixty (60) days of the effective date ofthis

10 decision, respondent shall enroll in a course in Ethics approved in advance by the Division or its

11 designee, and shall successfully complete the course during the first year of probation.

12 3. PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION Within thirty (30) days of the effective

13 date of this decision, and on a periodic basis thereafter as may be required by the Division or its

14 designee, respondent shall undergo a psychiatric evaluation (and psychological testing, if deemed

15 necessary) by Dr. David J. Sheffner, M.D., or, in the event of Dr. Sheffuer's unavailability, by a

16 Division-appointed psychiatrist, who shall furnish an evaluation report to the Division or its

1 7 designee. The respondent shall pay the cost of the psychiatric evaluation.

18 [f respondent is required by the Division or its designee to undergo psychiatric

19 treatment, respondent shall within thirty (30) days of the requirement notice submit to the

20 Division for its prior approval the name and qualifications of a psychiatrist ofrespondent's

21 choice. Respondent shall undergo and continue psychiatric treatment until further notice from

22 the Division or its designee. Respondent shall have the treating psychiatrist submit quarterly

23 status reports to the Division or its designee indicating whether the respondent is capable of

24 practicing medicine safely.

25 4. PSYCHOTHERAPY Within sixty (60) days of the effective date ofthis

26 decision, respondent shall submit to the Division or its designee for its prior approval the name

27 and qualifications of a psychotherapist of respondent's choice. Upon approval, respondent shall

28 undergo and continue treatment until the Division or its designee deems that no further

4

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

psychotherapy is necessary. Respondent shall have the treating psychotherapist submit quarterly

status reports to the Division or its designee. The Division or its designee may require

respondent to undergo psychiatric evaluations by a Division-appointed psychiatrist. If, prior to

the termination of probation, respondent is !ound not to be mentally fit to resume the practice of

medicine without restrictions, the Division shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the

respondent's license and the period of probation shall be extended until the Division determines

that the respondent is mentally fit to resume the practice of medicine without restrictions. The

respondent shall pay the cost of the therapy and evaluations.

5. OBEY ALL LAWS Respondent shall obey all federal, state and local

10 laws, all rules governing the practice of medicine in California, and remain in full compliance

11 with any court ordered criminal probation, payments and other orders.

12 6. QUARTERLY REPORTS Respondent shall submit quarterly

13 declarations under penalty of perjury on forms provided by the Division, stating whether there

14 has been compliance with all the conditions of probation.

15 7. PROBATION SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM COMPLIANCE

16 Respondent shall comply with the Division's probation surveillance program. Respondent shall,

17 at all times, keep the Division informed of her business and residence addresses which shall both

18 serve as addresses of record. Changes of such addresses shall be immediately communicated in

19 writing to the Division. Under no circumstances shall a post office box serve as an address of

20 record, except as allowed by Business and Professions Code section 2021 (b).

21 Respondent shall, at all times, maintain a current and renewed physician's and

22 surgeon's license.

23 Respondent shall also immediately inform the Division, in writing, of any travel

24 to any areas outside the jurisdiction of California which lasts, or is contemplated to last, more

25 than thirty (30) days.

26 8. INTERVIEW WITH THE DIVISION, ITS DESIGNEE OR ITS

27 DESIGNATED PHYSICIANCS) Respondent shall appear in person for interviews with the

28 Divisi.on, its designee or its designated physician(s) upon request at various intervals and with

5

L..--------------------·-

reasonable notice"

TOLLING FOR OUT-OF-STATE PRACTICE, RESIDENCE OR IN-

3 STATE NON-PRACTICE In the event respondent should leave California to reside or to

4 practice outside the State or for any reason should respondent stop practicing medicine in

5 California, respondent shall notifY the Division or its designee in writing within ten (10) days of

6 the dates of departure and return or the dates of non-practice within California. Non-practice is

7 defined as any period oftirne exceeding thirty (30) days in which respondent is not engaging in

8 any activities defined in Sections 2051 and 2052 of the Business and Professions Code. All time

9 spent in an intensive training program approved by the Division or its designee shall be

10 considered as time spent in the practice of medicine. A Board-ordered suspension of practice

11 shall not be considered as a period of non-practice. Periods of temporary or permanent residence

12 or practice outside California or of non-practice within California, as defined in this condition,

13 will not apply to the reduction of the probationary order.

14 10. CO.MPLETION OF PROBATION Upon successful completion of

15 probation, respondent's certificate shall be fully restored.

16 11 VIOLATION OF PROBATION If respondent violates probation in any

17 respect, the Division, after giving respondent notice and the opportunity to be heard, may revoke

18 probation and carry out the disciplinary order that was stayed. If an accusation or petition to

19 revoke probation is filed against respondent during probation, the Division shall have continuing

20 jurisdiction until the matter is final, arid the period of probation shall be extended until the matter

21 is final.

22 12. COST RECOVERY The respondent is hereby ordered to reimburse the

23 Division the amount of$5,000.00 within ninety (90) days of the effective date of this decision

24 for its investigative and prosecution costs. Failure to reimburse the Division's cost of

25 investigation and prosecution shall constitute a violation of the probation order, unless the

26 Division agrees in writing to payment by an installment plan because of financial hardship. The

27 filing of bankruptcy by the respondent shall not relieve the respondent ofher responsibility to

28 reimburse the Division for its investigative and prosecution costs.

6

----- - ·-- --------------------

13. PRDBADON COSTS ~pendent shall pay the costa associated with

2 probation monitoring each and every year of probation. as designated by the Divisi011., which are

3 currently set at S2.488.00, but may be: adjusted on an annual basis. Such costa shall be payable

4 to the Division of Medical Quality and delivered to the designated probation bll!Veillance

5 monitor no later than Ja.cuary 31 of each calendar yc:ar. Failure to pay costs within 30 days of the

6 due date shall constitute a violation of probation.

7 14. .LICENSE SURRENDER Following the effective date ofthis decision. if

8 respondent ceases practicing due to retirement, health reasons or is otherwise unable to satisfy

9 the terms and conditions of probation. respondent may voluntarily tender her certificate to the

10 Board. The Division reserves the right to evaluate the n:spondent's request and to exercise its

11 discretion whether to grant the request, or to take :my other action deemed appropriate and

12 reasonable under tbe circumstances. Upon formal ae<;eptancc of the tendered license, respondent

13 will not longer be aubj ect to the terms and conditions of probation.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ACCEPTANCE

I havo carefully read the above Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order and

have fully discuss;oo it with my attomey, Robert K. Weinberg. I understand the stipulation and

the effect it will have on my Physician's & Sw-geon's Certificate. I enter into this Stipulated ·

Senlement and Disciplinary Order voltmtarily, knowingly, and intelligently, and agree to be

bound by the Decision and OrtlJ;,r of the Division of Medical Quality, Medical Board of

California..

DATED: jQ j2_ {l2_

ALLA ZANDEJi1 M.D. Respondent

1 have re:ui Q.Od fully discussed with Respondent Alla Zander. M.D. the term& and

7

1 eonditio~ and other matters contained in the above Stipulated Settlement and Di.sciplina.ty

2 Order. I approve J.t' for;n and oontent.

3 DATED: ro/:.,-vf~-:- ,

EN!>ORSEMENI

4

5

6

7

8

9 The foregoing Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order is hereby respectfully

10 submitted for consideration by the Division of Medical Quality, Medical Board of California of

11 the Department of Conswncr Affairs.

12 I 13 DATED: _f___,!Oj~ (2;;_2-__,

7f--/_02---__ _

14

15

16

17

18

l9

20 001 Docl:(t Number. OJS7Jl~OI 2..S9S

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

BILL LOCKYER, Attorney Gt!neral of the St2te ofCalifornia

/~~ Deputy Attorney General


8

Exhibit A

First Amended Accusation No. 04~2000-108645

.. ·•

-- ---· -------------------------

Bll..L LOCKYER. Attorney General of the State of California

2 JOHN E. RITTMA YER, State Bar No. 67291 Deputy Attorney General

3 California Department of Justice 300 So. Spring Street, Suite 1702

4 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Telephone: (213) 897-7 48 5

5 Facsimile: (213) 897-1071

6 Attorneys for Complainant

7 BEFORE THE

8

9

10

DIVISION OF MEDICAL QUALITY MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA


11 In the Matter of the First Amended Accusation Against:

12 ALLA ZANDER, M.D.,

13 22932 Calle Azorin Mission Viejo, CA 92692

14 Physician & Surgeon Certificate No. A 61985

15

16

17

18 Complainant alleges:

Respondent.

PARTIES

Case No. 04-2000-108645

OAHNo.

FIRST AMENDED ACCUSATION

19

20 1. Ron Joseph ("Complainant") brings this Accusation solely in his official

21 capacity as the Executive Director of the Medical Board of California ("Board"), Department of

22 Consumer Affairs.

23 2. On or about April 4, 1997, the Board issued Physician & Surgeon

24 Certificate Number A 61985 to Alia Zander, M.D. (Respondent). The P~ysician & Surgeon

25 Certificate was in full force and effect at all times relevant to the charges brought herein and will

26 expire on October 31, 2004, linless renewed.

27

28

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

ll

12

13

14

15

16

JURISDICfiON

3. This Accusation is brought before the Board's Division of Medical Quality

("Division"), under the authority of the following sections of the Business and Professions Code

(Code).

4. Section 2227 of the Code provides that a licensee who is found guilty

under the Medical Practice Act may have his or her license revoked, suspended for a period not

to exceed one year, placed on probation and required to pay the costs of probation monitoring, or

such other action taken in relation to discipline as the Division deems proper.

5. Section 2234 of the Code in part states:

"The Division of Medical Quality shall take action against any licensee who is

charged with unprofessional conduct. In addition to other provisions of this article,

unprofessional conduct includes, but is not limited to, the following:

"(a) Violating or attempting to violate, directly or indirectly, or assisting in or

abetting the violation of, or conspiring to violate, any provision of this chapter [Chapter

5, the Medical Practice Act).

17 "(e) The commission of any act involving dishonesty or corruption which is

18 substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon."

19 6. Section 2236 of the Code in part states:

20 "(a) The conviction of any offense substantially related to the qualifications,

21 functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon constitutes unprofessional conduct within

22 the meaning of this chapter [Chapter 5, the Medical Practice Act). The record of

23 conviction shall be conclusive evidence only of the fact that the conviction occurred.

24

25 "(d) A plea or verdict of guilty or a conviction after a plea of nolo contendere is

26 deemed to be a conviction within the meaning of this section and Section 2236.1. The

2 7 record of conviction shall be conclusive evidence of the fact that the conviction

28 occurred."

·2

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

part:

7. California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 1360, states:

"For the purposes of denial, suspension or revocation of a license, certificate or

permit pursuant to Division 1.5 (commencing with Section 475) of the code, a crime or

act shall be considered to be substantially related to the qualifications, functions or duties

of a person holding a license, certificate or permit under the Medical Practice Act if to a

substantial degree it evidences present or potential unfitness of a person holding a license,

certificate or permit to perform the functions authorized by the license,· certificate or

permit in a manner consistent with the public health, safety or welfare. Such crimes or

acts shall include but not be limited to the following: Violating or attempting to violate,

directly or indirectly, or assisting in or abetting the violation of, or conspiring to violate

any provision of the Medical Practice Act."

8. Section 14124.12 ofthe Welfare and lnstitutions Code states, in pertinent

"(a) Upon receipt of written notice from the Medical Board of Calitomia., the

Osteopathic Medical Board of California, or the Board of Dental Examiners ofCalifomia,

that a licensee's license has been placed on probation as a result of a disciplinary action,

the department may not reimburse any Medi-Cal claim for the type of surgical service or

invasive procedure that gave rise to the probation, including any dental surgery or

invasive procedure, that was performed by the licensee on or after the effective date of

probation and until the termination of all probationary terms and conditions or until the

probationary period has ended, whichever occurs first. This section shall apply except in

any case in which the relevant licensing board determines that compelling circumstances

warrant the continued reimbursement during the probationary period of any Medi-Cal

claim, including any claim for dental services, as so described. In such a case, the

department shall continue to reimburse the licensee for all procedures, except for those

invasive or surgical procedures for which the licensee was placed on probation."

9. Section 125.3 of the Code provides, in pertinent part, that the Division

28 may request the administrative law judge to direct a licentiate found to have corrunitted a

3

violation or violations of the licensing act to pay a sum not to exceed the reasonable costs of the

2 investigation and enforcement of the case.

3

4 FIRST CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

5 (Acts Involving Dishonesty or Corruption)

6 10. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action Wider section 2234, subsection

7 (e) of the Code in that she has committed acts involving dishonesty or corruption substantially

8 related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon. The circumstances

9 are as follows:

10 June 10, 1999, Target Store, Mission Viejo

11 11. On or about June 10, 1999, respondent entered the Target store in Mission

12 Viejo. She took a toilet seat from the shelf and ripped the tag from the cover. She put the tag on

13 the shelf and the seat cover in her cart. She then selected two hand towels and two soap dishes

14 and placed them in her cart. She pushed her cart to the next aisle and removed the price tags

15 from the items, and then concealed them in her purse, zipped her purse closed and continued to

·16 shop. Next, she selected a pillow and went to the front registers. She paid for thepillow with a

17 credit card and made no attempt to pay for the concealed items in her purse, She then exited the

18 store.

19 12. When confronted by Target security personnel, respondent explained that

20 she wanted to get some things for her son. She picked out several bathroom items and placed

21 them in the cart. She took the tags off the items and put the items in her purse, concealing them.

22 She did not know why she took the merchandise from the store without purchasing it. She said

23 she had cash in her wallet to pay the babysitter. She also said she has never stolen anything

24 before and has never been arrested before.

25 13. Respondent later explained to Medical Board of California investigators:

26 "What I remember very clearly is that [ was extremely depressed and nervous. We just moved to

27 Mission Viejo from Los Angeles and I had a lot of things going on with my husband and family.

28 I wanted to make the house look presentable for the children because it was empty and it didn't

4

look good. I went to Target to buy some things for the house. I was shopping and my purse was

2 sitting in the front compartment of the shopping cart and I just put some stuff in my purse. I took

3 bathroom items and put them in the purse. I didn't feel I was doing something wrong, but I did

· 4 feel very nervous, and very .... like I wanted to break out.... it's hard to explain. I felt very, very

5 sad, I felt like crying."

6 14. Respondent stated she had personal problemsprior to the Target incident.

7 Her family had just moved to the Mission Viejo area and she said, "it was an extremely lonely

8 time because everything and everyone I have was in L.A., and everybody was against this move,

9 so I was sort oflike boycotted." She also said she had a lot of turmoil in her relationship with her

10 husband. She had difficulty adjusting to the move, so it was like "one soldier in a battlefield."

11 June 20, 1999, Stater Bros. Market, Fountain Valley

12 15. On June 20, 1999, respondent entered the Stater Brothers store in Fountain

13 Valley with a large, empty bag. She placed the bag in a shopping cart, and put two packages of

14 disposable diapers in the front of the cart in a manner which hid the bag. She then put a plant,

15 some gardening tools, a watering can, some plant food and packages of cherries, raspberries and

16 blueberries into the bag while shopping throughout the store. She zipped up the bag. At the

17 checkout stand she paid for two items, the diapers and dog food, and left the store with the other

18 unpaid items in her bag. She was detained by a store security officer.

19 16. In an interview, Respondent told Medical Board investigators: For several

20 months she was depressed due to her family situation and exhausted from taking care of her ill

21 baby daughter. On this occasion, she went shopping during her lunch break. She

22 absentmindedly put a bag of cherries in her purse. It was pointed out to her by the store security

23 officer when he arrested her.

24 July 28, 2000, Von's Market, Laguna Niguel

25 17. · On July 28,2000, in the Yon's Market in Laguna Niguel, respondent

26 concealed $137.51 worth of groceries into a black purse that she placed in the shopping cart with

27 the zipper open and a Von's newsletter over the top. She then went to the-check stand and

28 purchased two items totaling just over three dollars. She did not attempt to pay for the items

5

2

3

-4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

. 15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

concealed in the black purse. When she exited the store, she was detained by store security

personnel, who summoned the police.

18. Respondent initially lied about her history of shoplifting to the police

officer who responded. When the officer discovered the truth, respondent cried, apologized and

explained as follows: Her daughter was sick and was currently in the hospital. She stole the

food so she could fix something nic~ for the nurses who were taking care of her daughter. She

stated she knows she should not steal, but she just wanted to do something nice for the nurses.

September 10, 2001, Pavilions Market, Mission Viejo

19. On September 10, 2001, while shopping at the Pavilions Market, located

at 26022 Marguerite, Mission Viejo, California, respondent placed five food items in her jacket

and 21 food and novelty items, in a large nylon bag. She paid for two loaves of bread at the

check stand, making no attempt to pay for the items in her jacket and bag. She exited the store

with the bread and the other concealed items. Pavilions security personnel apprehended

respondent before she could drive away in the 2000 Jaguar automobile that she drove to the

market. The items respondent stole had a retail value of$153.92 .

Respondent's psychological state

20. In July, 1999, respondent began Nancy Clark's Shoplifters Alternative

Course. In November, 1999, she ceased attending sessions of Shoplifters Alternative prior to the

completion of the course. Between January and April, 2001, respondent again began and this

time completed the Shoplifters Alternative Course.

21. In or about August, 2000, respondent began self-medicating with

antidepressant medications she obtained as office samples from her places of employment.

22. On or about September 10,2001, respondent was again arrested for

shoplifting.

23. On October9 and 10,2001, respondent underwent a voluntary psychiatric

evaluation at the request of the Medical Board. The evaluation revealed her to be a .

psychiatrically deeply disturbed individual. The evaluator concluded that, from a diagnostic

perspective, respondent gives evidence of having "chronic depression" (Dysthymic Disorder), an

6

----------------------

eating disorder, kleptomania (with extremely severe self-sabotaging behavior), marital problems,

2. and prominent problems with self-esteem and rebelliousness. The examiner found that

3 respondent should have been receiving, and is very much in immediate need oftreatment by, a

. 4 Board certified psychiatrist. ,She also needs a good trial on a number of psychotropic

5 medications. The examiner also reported the potential that respondent's psychiatric statu!l may

6 decompensate and this could compromise her ability to safely engage in the practice of medicine.

7

8

9

10 24.

SECOND CAUSE ~OR DISCIPLINE

(Conviction of Substantially Related Offenses)

Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under sections 2234 and 2236,

11 subsection (a) of the Code in that she has been convicted of an offense substantially related to the

12 qualifications, functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon. The circumstances are as

13 follows:

14 25. The facts and circumstances alleged in paragraphs 8 through 20 above are

15 incorporated here as if fully set forth.

16 26. With respect to the June 10, 1999 incident alleged above, respondent was

17 charged with a violation of Penal Code section 488 in People of the State ofCalifom,ia v. Alia

18 Zander, Superior Court, County of Orange case number SM99SM59791

19 27. On or about October 21, 1999, respondent was convicted of the charge

20 alleged in paragraph 26 after a plea of guilty.

21 28. With respect to the June 20, 1999 incident alleged above, respondent was

22 charged with a violation of Penal Code section 488 in People of the State of California v. Alia

23 Zander, Superior Court, County of Orange case number FV99WM0706.

24 29. On or about August 5, 1999, respondent was convicted of the charge

25 alleged in paragraph 28 after a plea of guilty

26 30. With respect to the July 28, 2000 incident alleged above, respondent was

27. charged with a violation of Penal Code section 488 in People of the State of California v. Alia

28 Zander, Superior Court, County of Orange case number SHOOSM04959 .

. 7

-------------------·---~-·-·· --

31. On or about December 13, 2000, respondent was convicted of the ch(lfge


3 32. With respect to the September 10, 2001 incident allegedabove; respondent

4 was charged with a violation of Penal Code section 459 in People oftheStal{ofCa[ifolftiav.

5 Alia Zander, Superior Court, County of Orange case number SH01SM04843.

6 33. On or about October 9, 2001, respondent was convicted ofthecharge


8

9 PRAYER

10 WHEREFORE, Complainant requests that a hearing be held on the matters herein

11 alleged, and that following the hearing, the Division of Medical Quality issue a decision:

12 1. Revoking or suspending Physician & Surgeon Certificate Number A

13 61985, issued to Alla Zander, M.D.;

14 2. Revoldng, suspending or denying approval of Alla Zander, M.D.'s

15 authority to supervise physicia.r1's assistants, pursuant to section 3527 of the Code;

16 3. Ordering Alia Zander, M.D. to pay the Division of Medical Quality the

17 reasonable costs of the investigation and enforcement of this case, and, if placed on probation,

18 the costs of probation monitoring;

19 4. Taking such other and further action as deemed necessary and proper.

20

21

22

23

DATED: August 26, 2002

24

25

26

27

28

--------------------

RONJO~R Execu:Ve irector Medical Board of California Department of Consumer Affairs · State of California Complainant

8

a{;4patientsafety.org/documents/zander, alla 2016-012-20.pdf · 2018. 1. 7. · of the state...

Documents