medical board of california department of consumer …4patientsafety.org/documents/stanton, james...

BEFORE THE MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS STATE OF CALIFORNIA

In the Matter of the Accusation ) Against: )

) )

James Lewis Stanton, M.D. ) )

· Physician's and Surgeon's ) Certificate No. G 30530 )

) Respondent )

Case No. 800-2016-027929 ·

DECISION

The attached Stipulated Surrender of License and Order 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 5:00 p.m. on Fe~ruary i 9, 2019.

ITISSOORDERED February 12, 2019.

MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA

XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General of California

2 STEVE DIEHL Supervising Deputy Attorney General

3 SARAH J. JACOBS Deputy Attorney General

4 State Bar No. 255899 California Department of Ju~tice

5 2550 Mariposa Mall, Room 5090 Fresno, CA 93721

6 Telephone: (559) 705-2312 Facsimile: (559) 445-5106

7 Attorneys for Complainan{

8

9 BEFORE THE

10

MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORN,A DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 11

12

13

14

15

In the Matter of the Accusation Against:

JAMES LEWIS STANTON, M.D. 2625 Coffee Rd., Ste. F Modesto, CA 95355

Physician's 3nd Surgeon's Certificate No. 16 G 30530

17 Respondent.

Case No. 800-2016-027929

STIPULATED SURRENDER OF LICENSE AND ORDER

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

20 entitled proceedings that the following matters are true:

21 PARTIES

22 1. Kimberly Kirchmeyer (Complainant) is the current Executive Director of the Medical

23 Board of California (Board). She brought this action solely in her official capacity and is

24 · represented in this matter by Xavier Becerra, Attorney General of the State of California, by

25 Sarah J. Jacobs, Deputy Attorney General.

26 · 2. James Lewis Stanton, M.D. (Respondent) is represented in this proceeding by

27 attorney Robert F. Hahn, Esq., whose address is: 2550 Ninth Street, Suite 101,

28 Berkeley, CA 94710-2551.

Stipulated Surrender of License and Disciplinary Order (Case No. 800-2016-027929) .

3. On or about August I, 1975, the Board issued Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate

· 2 No. G 30530 to James Lewis Stanton, M.D. (Respondent). The Physician's and Surgeon's

· 3 Certificate was in full force and effect at ·all times relevant to the charges b.rought in Accusation

4 No. 800-2016-027929 and expired on August 31, 2018.

5 -JURISDICTION

6 4. Accusation No. 800-2016-027929 was filed before the Board, and is currently

7 pending against Respondent; The Accusation and all other statutorily required document$ were

8 properly served on Respondent on August 28, 2018. Respondent timely filed his Notice of

9 Defense contesting the Accusation. A copy of Accusation No. 800-2016-027929 is attached as·

IO Exhibit A and incorporated by referenc.e.

11 ADVISEMENT AND WAIVERS

12 S. Respondent has carefully read, fully discussed with counsel, and understands the .

13 charges and allegations in Accusation No. 800-2016-027929. Respondent also has carefully read,

14 fully discussed with.counsel, and understands the effects of this Stipulated Surrender of License

15 and Order.

16 6. Respondent is fully aware of his legal rights in this matter, including the right fo a

17 hearing on the charges and allegations in the Accusation; the right to confront and cross-examine

18 the witnesses against him; the right to present evidence and to testify on his own behalf; the right

19 to the issuance of subpoenas to compel the attendance of witnesses and the product~on of

20 docwnents; the right to reconsideration and court review of an adverse decision; and all other

21 rights accorded by the California Administrative Procedure Act and other applicable laws ..

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

23 every right set forth above ..

24 CULPABILITY

25 · 8. Respondent 1:lllderstands that the charges and allegations in Accusation No. 800-2016-

26 027929, if proven at a hearing, constitute cause for imposing discipline ~pon his Physician's and

27 Surgeo11's Certificate.

28

---------- ·····························-············

1 9. Respondent does not contest that, at dll, administrative hearing, Complainant could

2 establish a pr~a facie case with respect to the charges and allegations contained in Accusation

3 No. 800-2016-027929 and that he has thereby subjected his license to disciplinary action.

4 Respondent agrees that if he ever petitions for reinstatement of his Ph)rsician' s and Surgeon's

5 Certificated· No. G 30530, all of the charges and allegations contained in Accusation No. 800-

6 2016-027929 shall be deemed true, correct, and fully admitte,d by Respondent for purposes of that

7 reinstatement proceeding or any other licensing proceeding involving Respondent in the State of ·

8 California

9 10. Respondent understands that by signing this &tipulation he enables the Board to issue ·

10 an order accepting the surre1:1der of his Physician's and Surgeon'~ Certificate without further

ll process.

12 CONTINGENCY

13 11. Business and Professions Code section 22~4, subdivision (b ), provides, in pertinent

14 part, that the Medical Board "shall delegate to its executive director the authority to adopt a

15 stipulation fo! surrender of a license."

16 12. This Stipulated Surrender of License and Disciplinary Order shall be subject to

17 approval of the Executive Director on behalf of the Medical Board. The parties agree that this

18 Stipulated Surrender of License and Disciplinary Order shall be submitted to the Executive

19 Director for her consideration in the above-entitled matter and, further, that the Executive

20 Director shall have a reasonable period of time in which to consider and act on this ·stipulated

21 Surrender of License and Disciplinary Order after receiving it. By signing this stipulation,

22 Respondent fully understands and agrees that he may not withdraw his agreement or seek to

23 rescind this stipulation prior to the time the Executive Director, on behalf of the Medical Board,

24 considers and acts upon it.

25 13. The parties agree that this Stipulated Surrender of License and Disciplinary Order

26 shall be null and void and not binding upon the parties unless approved and adopted by the

27 Executive Director on behalf of the Board, except for this paragraph, which shall remain in full

28 force and effect. Respondent fully understands and agrees that in deciding whether or not to

approve and adopt this Stipulated Surrender of License and Disciplinary Ord~r. the Executive

2 Director and/or the Board may receive oral and written communications from its staff and/or the

3 Attorney General's Office. Communications pursuant to this paragraph shall not disqualify the

4 Executive Director, the Board, any member thereof, and/or any other person from future

5 participation in this or any other matter affecting or involving Respondent. In the event that the

6 Executive Director on behalf of the Board does not, in her discretion, approve and adopt this

7 Stipulated Surrender-of License and Disciplinary Order, with the exception of this paragraph, it

8 shall not be~ome effective, shall be of no evidentiary value whatsoever, and shall not be relied

9 upon or introdueed in any disciplinary action by either party hereto. Respondent further agrees

10 that should this Stipulated Surrender of License and Disciplinary Order be rejected for any reason

11 by the Executive Director on behalf of the Board, Respondent will assert no claim that the

12 Executive Director, the Board, or any member thereof, was prejudiced by its/his/her review,

13 discussion and/or consideration of this Stipulated Surrender of License and Disciplinary Order or

14 of any matter or matters related hereto.

15 14. The parties understand and agree that, Portable Document Format (PDF) and facsimile

16 copies of this Stipulated Surrender of License and Order, incl~ding PDF and facsimile signatures

. 17 thereto, shall have the same force and effect as the originals.

18 15. In consideration of the foregoing admissions and stipulations, the parties agree that

19 the Board may, without further notice or formal proceeding, issue and enter the following Order:

-20 ORDER

21 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate No. G 30530, is5ued

22 to Respondent James Lewis Stanton, M.D., is surrendered and accepted by the Medical Board of

23 California.

24 L The surrender of Respondent's Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate and the

25 acceptance of the surrendered license by the Board shall c_onstitute the imposition of discipline

26 against Respondent. This stipulation constitutes a record of the discipline and shall become a part

27 pf Respondent's license history with the Medical Board of California.

28

----··- .. _____ ,, _____ .... _ .... ------------------- .... - ---------. -- ------- --- ----------.

2. R~spondent shall lose all rights and privileges as a physician and sul-geon in

2 California as of the effective date of the Board's Decision and Order.

3 3. Respondent shall cause to be delivered to the ·Board his pocket license, if one was

4 issued, and his wall «ertificate on or before the effective date of the Decision and Order.

5 4. If Respondent ever files an application for licenSure or a petition for reinstatement in

6 the State of California, the Board shall treat it as a petition for reinstatement Respondent must

7 comply wjth all the laws, regulations, and procedures for reinStatement of a revoked or

8 surrendered license in effect at the time the petition is filed, and all of the charges and allegations

9 contained in Accusation No. 800-2016-027929 shall be deemed to be true, correct, and admitted

1 O by Respondent when the Board determines whether to grant or deny the application or petition.

11 5. If Respondent should ever apply or reapply for a new license or certification, or

12 petition for reinstatement of a license, by any other health care licensing agency in the State of

13 California, all of the charges and allegations contained in Accusation, No. 800-2016-027929 shall

"14 be deemed to be true, correct, and admitted by Respondent for the purpose of any Statement of

15 Issues or any other proceeding seeking to deny or restrict licerisure ..

16 ACCEPTANCE

17 I have carefully read the above Stipulated Surrender of License and Order and have fully

18 discussed it with my attorney, Jake Reinhardt, Esq ... I understand the stipulation and the effect it

19 will have on my Physician's and Surgeon• s Certificate. I enter into tbJs Stipulated Surrender of

20 License arid Order voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently, and agree to be bound by the

21 Decision and Order of the Board.

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DATED:

J S LEWIS STANTON, M.D. Respondent

5

Stipulated Surrender of License and Disciplinar,yOrder (Case No. 800-2016-027929)

1 I have read and fully discussed with Respondent James Lewis Stanton, M.D. the terms and

2 conditions and other matters contained in this Stipulated Surrender of License and Order. I

3 approve its form and content.

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

DATED:

Attorney for Respondent

ENDORSEMENT

The foregoing Stipulated Surrender of License and Order in case number 800-2016-027929

is hereby respectfully submitted for consideration by the Medical_ Board of California of the

Department of Consumer Affairs.

Dated: l- \ 'b- \ C\

FR2018102165 Stanton surrender amended.docx

Respectfully submitted,

XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General of California STEVE DIEHL Supervising Deputy Attorney General

SARAH J. JACOBS Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Complainant

Exhibit A

Accusation No. 800-2016-027929

.. 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

XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General of California MATTHEW M. DAVIS . Supervising Deputy Attorney General JOHNS. GATSCHET . Deputy Attorney Geheral State Bai No. 244388

California Department of Justice 1300 I Street, Suite 125 P.O. Box 944255

. Sacramento, CA 94244-2550 Telephone: ~916) 210-7546 Facsimile: (916) 327-2247

Attorneys for Complainant

FILED . STATE OF CALIFORNIA

· SACRAMENTO_ IJ ... 1'g 20 t qs ,M. E=·ORN~ . BY ~ . . . NALYST

·BEFORE THE MEDICAL BOARD OF CALJ}'ORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS STATE OF CALIFORNIA

In the Matter of the Accusation Agains~:

·.James Lewis Stanton, M.D. · 200 B W. Rqseburg Ave., Ste. 1 Modesto, CA 95350 .

. .

Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate No. G 30530,

. Respondent

Complainant alleges:

PARTIES

Case No. 800-2016-027929

ACCUSATION

1. Kimberly Kirch:meyer ("Complainant") brin$s this Accusation solely in her official

capacity as the Executive Director-of the Medical Board of California, Department of Consumer .

Affairs ("Board").

2. On or about August 1, 1975, the Medical Board· issued Physician's and SUFgeon's

. Certificate Number G 30530 to James Lewis Stanton, M.D.:("Respondent"). That Certificate was

in full force and effect at all times relevant to the charges brought herein and will expire on·

August 31, 2018, unless renewed.

I II

1

(JAM~S LEWIS STANTON, M.D.) ACCUSATION NO. 800-2016-027929

I

1

·2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

JURISDICTION

3. Thi~ f\ccusa!~on is broµght before the Board, under the authority of the following

laws. All section references are to the Business and Professions Code ("Code") unless otherwise

indicated.

4. Section 2227 of the Code provid~s in pertinent part, 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 pfobatioi;.· and required to pay the costs of probation monitoring,

or such other action taken in relation to discipline as the Board deems proper.

5. Section 2234 of the Code states, in pertinent part:

"The b_oard 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) ~iolating or attempting to. ':'iolate, .directly or indirectly, assisting in or abetting the

violation of, or ·conspiring to violate any provision of this chapter.

"(b) Gross negligence.

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

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

the applicable standard of care shall constitute repeated negligent acts.

"(1) An initial negligent diagnosis follQwed by an act or omission medically appropriate for

that negligent.diagnosis of the patient shall c~nstitute a single negligent act.

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

constitutes the negligent act described in paragraph (1), inciudin.g, but not limited to, a

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

applicable st~ndard of care, each departure constitutes a separate and distinct breach of the

25 · standard of care ..

26

27

28

II/.

I II

" "

2

(JAMES LEWIS STANTON, M.D.) ACCUSATION NO, 800·2016-027929

6. Section 2266 of the Code states, in pertinent part: . .

2 "The failure of a physician and surgeon to maintain adequate and accurate records relating

3 to the provisic~n of services to their patients constitutes unprofessional .conduct.''

4 PERTINENT DRUG INFORMATION

5 7. • Fentanyl-Generic name for the drug Duragesic. Fentanyl is a potent,. synthetic

6 opioid analgesic with a rapid onset and short duration of actfon used for pai~. The fentanyl

7 transdermal patch is used for long term chronic pain and each patch provides continuous relief for . .

8 three days. It has an extremely high danger of abuse and can lead to addiction as the medication

9 is estimated to be 80 times more potent than morphine and hundreds of times more potent than

1 Q heroill. 1 Fentanyl is a Schedu!e II controlled substance pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations

11 Title 21 section 1308.1~. Fentanyl is a dangerous drug pursuant to California Business and

12 Professio~s Code section 4022 and is a Schedule II controlled substance pursuant to California .

13 Health and Safety Code sectio~ 11055(c).

14 8. Oxycodone with acetaminophen - Generic name for Percocet and Endocet. Percocet

15 is a short ~cting opioid analgesic used to treat moderate to severe pain. Percocet is a Schedule II

16 co.ntrolled substance pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations Title 21section13-08.12. Percocet

17 is a dangerous drug pursuant to California Business and Professions Code section 4022 and is a . ·. . .

18 Schedule II coq.trolled substance pursuant to California Health and Safety Code section 1)055(b). . . .

9. Tapentadol - Generic name for Nucynta. Tapentadol is a centrally.short acting opioid . .

20 analgesic with a four-to-six-hour anatgesic effect. Tapentadol is considered to be more potent

21 than tramadol but less potent than morphine: Tapenta~ol is a Schedule II controlled substance

22 pursuant to Code of Federal Regulation~ Title 21 section 1308:12: ·1:'apentadol is a dangerous

23 drug pursuant to California Business and Professions Code section 4022 ...

24 10. Carisoprodol - Generic nafile for Soma. Catisoprodol is a centrally acting skeletai

25 muscle relaxant.. On Jani;ary 11, 2012, Carisoprodol was classified a Schedule IV.controlled

26 i II

27 . 28

1 http://Wwv\r.cdc.gov/niosh/ershdb/EmergencyResponseCard _ 297 5 0022.html.

3

(JAMES LEWIS STANTON, M.D.) ACCUSATION NO. 800-2016-027929

1 substanc_e pursua~t to Code of Federal Regulations Title 21 section 1308.14(c). It is a. dangerous

2 drug pursuant to Busjness and Professions Code section 4022.

3 11. Alptazolam - Generic name for the drugs Xanax and Niravam. Alprazolam is a short

4 . acting· benzod~azepine used to treat anxiety. Alprazol_am is a Schedule IV controUed substance ·

5 pursuant to Cqde of Federal Regulations Title 21 section 13 08.14. Alprazolam is a dangerous

6 · drug pursuant to California Bu~irn~ss and Profession.s Code section 4022 and is a Schedule IV

7 controlled substance pursuant to Californfa Heruth aIJ.d Safety Code section 11057(d).

8 12. ~olpidem Tartrate - Generic name for Ambien. Zolpidem Tartrate is· a sedative and

· 9 ·hypnotic used for short term treatrrient of insomnia.· Zolpidem Tartrate is a Schedule IV

W controlled substance pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations Title 21·section1308.14(~)~ It isa

11 Schedule iV conti:olled substance pursuant to Health and Safety Code secti~n 11057, subdivision . .

12 (d), and a dangerous drug pursuant to Business and Professions .Code section 4022.

13 13. Phentermine HCL- Generic for Adipex. Phentermine HCL is psychosthnulant drug

14 of the substitutec,i amphetamine chemical class, with pharmacology ~imilar to_ amphetamine.

15 Pheritermine HCL is a Schedule IV controlled st~bstance pur.suant to Code of Federal Regulations . . .

16 Title 21section1308.14(f). Ph~nterinine-HCL is a dangerous drug pursuant to California

17 Business and Professions Code s_ection 4022.

18 14. Hydrocodone with acetaminophen- G~neric name for the drugs Vicodiri, Norco, and

19 . Lortab. Hydrocod_one with acetaminophen is classified as an opioid analgesic combination . .

20 product used to treat moderate to moderately seve~e pain. Prior to October 6, 2014, Hydrocodone

21 with acetaminophen was a Schedule III controlled substance-pursuant to. Code of Federal .. 22 Regulations !itle 21 section 1308.13(e). Currently, it is a Schedule.iI controlled_substanc;:es.2

23 Hydrocodone with. acetaminophen is a dangerous drug pur~uant to California Business and

24 Professions Code section 4022 and i~ a Schedule II controlled substance pursuant to California

25 Health and Safety Code section 11055, subdivision (b):

26

27

28

2 O~ October 6, 2014, Hydrocodone combination products were reclassified as Schedule II controlled substances. Federal Register Volume 79, Number 163. Code of Federal Regulations Title 21section1308.12 ..

4

(JAMES LEWIS STANTON, M.D.) ACCUSATION NO. 800-20'!_6-027929

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

'-

15. ~oraz~pam- Generic name for Ativan. Lorazepam is a member of the·

benzodiazepine family and is a fast acting anti-anxiety medication used for the short-term

management of se_vere anxiety. Lorazepam is a Schedule IV controlled substance pursuant to

Code o~Federal Regulations Title 21section1308.14(c) ai;id Health and Safety Code section

11057, subdivision (d), and a dangerous drug pursuant to Business and Professions Code section

4022.

16. Diazepam-9eneric name for Valium .. Diazeprun is a long-acting member of the

benzodiazepine family used for the treatment of anxiety and panic attacks. Diazepam is.a . .

Schedule iV controlled substance pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations Title 21 section

l 308. l 4(c) and Health and Safety Code section 11057, subdivision ( d), and a dangerous drug .

pursuant to Business and Professions Code section 4022 ..

FIRST CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

(Gross Negligence)

17. Respondent's license is subject to disciplinary action under section 2234, subdivision . . . ~

. . (b) of the Code in that he committed gross negligence during the care and ·treatment of Patient I 3

by proyiding excessive prescriptions of controlled substances. The circumstances are as follows:

18. The Medical Board obtained Patient l's certified medical records maintained by

Respondent from November 8, 2004, to September 30, 2017. During thattime Respondent

prescribed controlled substance~ to Patient 1. For ~xample, between March 2, 2016, and·

. September 19, 2016, Respondent prescribed or re-filled the following controlled substances to

Patient 1.

Date.Filled Prescription Quantity D9sage Schedule

·March 2, 2016 Nucynta 240 tablets 100 mg.· II

March 2, 2016 Fentanyl Patch 30 patches 100 mcg./hr. II

March 2, 2016 Percocet 240 tablets 10/325 mg. II

March 17, 2q16 Alprazolam 270 tablets · 2mg. IV

3 All identifying information has been removed from the Accusation. All witnesses will be fully identified in discovery: . · ' . . ·

5

(JAMES LEWIS S0

TANTON1 M.D.) ACCUSATION NO. 800-2016-027929

2

3

4

5

.6

7

8

9

10

11 ·

12

1 :3

14

15

16

17

18

19

. 20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28.

Date Filled

March 18, 2016 ·

March 18, 2016

April 12, 2016

April 21, 2016

April 22, 2016

April 29, 2016

April 29, 2016

April 29, 2.016

May 16, 2016

May 23, 2016

May24, 2016

May 27, 2016

May 27~ 2016

June 13, 2016

June 16, 2016

June 24, 2016

June 24, 2016 ..

July 13, 2016 .

July 21, 2016

July 22, 2016

July 22, 2016

July ?5, 2016

August 3, 2016

August 9, 2016

August 10,·2016

August 11, 201:6

Prescription · · Quantity Strength· Schedule

Phentermine HCL 30 tablets 37.5 mg. IV

Am bi en 90 tablets lOmg. ·Iv

Carisoprodol 120 tablets 350 mg. IV -

Alprazolam 270 tablets 2mg. IV


Nucynta 240 tablets 100 mg. II

Fentanyl Patch 30 patches 1 o.o mcg./hr. II

Percocet ·- 240 tablets 10/325 mg. II

. Carisoprodol 120 tablets 350 mg. IV

Phentermine HCL 30 tablets. 37.5 mg. IV

Alprazolam 270 tablets 2mg. ·IV

Fentanyl Patch . 30 patches 100 mcg./hr. · II

Percocet 240 tablets 10/3~5 mg. II

Carisoprodol 120 tablets 350.mg. IV

Phentermine HCL 90. tablets 30mg. IV

Fentanyl Patch 30 patches 100 mcg./hr. II

Percocet 240 tablets 10/325 mg. II

Carisoprodol 120 tablets 350 mg. IV

Nucynta · 240 tablets 100 mg. II

Fentanyl Patch 30 patches 100 mcg./hr. II

Percocet 240 tablets 10/325 mg. II

Am bi en 90 tablets .IO mg. ..IV

Phentermine HCL · 30 tablets 37.5 mg. IV

Carisoprodol 120 tablets 350 mg. IV


Alprazolam 270 tablets 2mg. IV

6


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Date Fiiled

August 18, 2016

August 19, 2016

August 19, 2016

Sept. 9, 2016

Sept. 19, 2016

Sept. 19, 2016

Sept. 19, 2016

Prescription

Nucynta

Fentanyl Patch

Percocet

Carisoprodo l

Alprazolam

Percocet

Fentanyl Patch

Quantity Strength Schedule

240 tablets 100 mcg. II

30 patches 100 mcg./hr. II

240 pills 10/325 mg. II

120 tablets 350 mg. IV

· 720 tablets 1 ing. IV

240 tablets 10/325 mg. II


9 19. In addition to the prescriptions from 2016 set forth above, Respondent issued similar

10

11

12

13

14

. 15

16

17

18

. 19

20

21

22

prescription~ or refills on multiple other occasions between November 29, 2013, and November

29, 2016. Assuming that Patient 1 was taking the prescriptions issue4 between March 2, 2016,

and September 19, 2016, over a tbirty-day period as Respondent prescribed and/or authorized

refilled she would.have used approximately three fontanyl patches per day (300 mcg./hr~), 8

tablets of Percocet per day (80 mg. of oxycodone ), and 8 ~ablets of Nucynta per day (800 mg. of . .

tapentadol}. This converts to a Morphine Equivale~t Dose4 ("MED") of 11.60 per day .

Respondent's prescriptions over a thirty-day period as prescribed also included approximately 9

pills of alprazolam per day (18 mg.; of alprazolam), 4 pills of Soma per day (1400 mg. of

carisoporodol), 1·l0 mg. tablet of Ambien per day, and 1 37.5 mg. tablet of phentermine per day.

Ov~raU, Respondent was providing a long acting- narcotic, two short-acting narcotics; multiple

sedatives, and a stimulant to Patient 1 based on his prescribing during th8:t time .. Respondent

documented that he was .prescribing opiates for. pain. Respondent documented that he was

prescribing alprazolam for anxiety.5 .

23 20. In November 2014, the Medical Board of California issued their new chronic pain

24

25

26

27

28

management guidelines. In the guidelines, the Medical Bo8:~d provided a yellow flag warning

4 An MED is a numerical stand~rd against which most opiods can be compared, yielding an apples-to-apples comparison of each medication's potency. ·

5 https://www.drugs .. com/dosage/alprazolam.html. A 4 mg. maximum daily dose of alprazolam is recommended for the treatment of anxiety. A IO mg. maximum daily dose of alprazolam is recommended for the treatment of panic disorders. Respondent was providing 18. mg. of alprazolam per day based on his prescriptions. ·

7


. .

1 once an MED reaches 80 mg./day._ Respondent's prescriptions were 14 times that limit. The

2 . Me.dical Board in the guidelines noted that patients .taking benzodiazepines and opioids at the

3 same time are at a higher risk for respiratory depression. In addition, the Medical Board provided

4 guidelines for proper pain management documentation.

5 21. Respondent's medical records kept for Patient 1 were reviewed .. On March 2; 2016,

6 March 31, 2016, April 28, 2016, May 17, 2016, June 16, 2016, and, July 20, 2016, Respondent

7 · documented progress notes for Patient 1. While the progress notes document that Respondent

8 listed prescribed controlled substances and documented different pain complaints made by Patient

·9 1, the medical records do not document a: treatment plan for opiate _pain management, a periodic

1 O review of progress, an informed consent, an explanation of the possible risks regarding the

11 medications beirig prescribed, or a physical examination of ~he areas that the patient stated were . .. .

12 causing her pain: On July 27, 2016, Respondent documented performing an annual wellness

13 examination and documented performing a detailed physical examination. While Respondent

14 listed the prescriptions that he was providing to Patient 1, and listed a medical history that

15 included a list of various pain complaints, Respondent failed ·to document a comprehensive ·

16 . treatment plan for chronic pain management, a periodic review of progress on chronic pain

17 management, pro~iding an infonned consent, and document an explanation of possible risks !

18 regarding th_e ~edications being prescribed: _Respondent's physical examin_ation failed to actual~y

19 document that he examined the are.as that the patient stated were causing her pain. In faqt,

20 Respondent document~d that Patient l's fun~tional ability was "within. normal limits" and that her

21 musculosl(eletal examination. was "normal." The deficiencies regarding the documentation of . .

22 pain management care found in the medical records reviewed between March 2, 2016, a.J.?-d July .

23 27, 2016, are repeated in all of the medical records ~ept for Patient 1 between November ?9,

24 2013, and November 29, 2016. A pain medicine contract was not documented in the medical

25 records. Respondent also documented that the pati.ent suffered from fibromyalgia but there was

26 no clear documentation in any of the medical records regarding how the Respondent had reached

27 a.diagnosis offibromyalgia. While Respondent at times documented Patient l's different pain

28 I I I

8


1 ailments, there was no clear me.dical indication listed which would warrant Respondent's

2 prescriptions, especially in light the excessively high doses that were being prescribed.

3 22. A review_ofthe certified medical records kept by Respondent forPatient 1 revealed

4 that ~n June 17, 2014, Respondent was notified that Patient. I had been remo:ved from work as a

5 registered nurse by her employer after she was observed.to not be fit for duty after exhibiting ..

6 signs of slurred speech while at work. Resp.ondent wa,s being prescribing fentanyl, Nucynta,

7 Percocet, Anibien, Soma, and alprazolam·to Patient 1 in June 2014, albeit at lower doses than

8 would later be prescribed in 2016, Respondent admitted at his subject interview with the Medical

.9 Board on March 16, 2018, that he was aware of that notification but cleared Patfent 1 to return to

1 O wo~k as a registered nurse and then later increased her medication dosages ..

11 23. li1 reviewing.the medical records, Respondent began prescribing a total of 15 1 OQ

12 nicg./hr. 3-day fentanyl pat,ches per month to Patient 1 on Aug(1st 11, 2014. Respondent began ·

13 prescribing a total of 30 100 rricg./hr. 3-day fentanyl patches per month to Patient 1 on February 3,

14 2016 .. :Respondent continued prescribing 30 1 oo mcg.!hr. 3-day fentanyl patches per month to . .

15 . Patient 1thr?ugh_2017. Respondent stated he prescribed Patient 1 more fentanyl patches than

16 recommended because Patient 1 suffered from excessive sweating and was unable to keep the

1 7 patch on for .inore than one _day before they lost adhesion. The records, assuming Patient 1 was . .

18 only using a 3-day fentanyl patch for one day, show that Respondent had no procedure in·pla.ce t_o

19 ·document wastage of the remaining 1 to 2 days of fenta:p.yl that remained on the fentanyl patches.

·20 On March 9,· 2017; Respondent documented· that a pharmacy made an inquiry into why Patient 1

21 was receiving 30 3-day patches every 30 days. Respondent documented that Patient l suffered

· 22 from excessive sweating.and continued to prescribe 30 patches a inonth. Respondent admitted

23 during the interview with the Medical Board· of California on March 16, 2018, th~t he had no ·way

24 to know if Patient 1 was diverting her fentanyl patches. Respondent never documented trying

25 Patient 1 on a different long acting opiate medication that was not in patch form to avoid wastage.

26 I I I

27 111

28 I I l

9


24. ·Respondent's treatment of Patient 1 as documented above by prescriblng an excessive

2 amount of high-dose opiates, muscle relaxants, and benzodiazepines6 conclirrently to treat

3 fibromyalgia and anxiety without a clear m~dical indication for their use 'represents gross

4 negligence as the.multiple addictiv~- and ce~tral nervous_ system acting agents used concomitantly

5 can lead. to respiratory depression and death.

6 SECOND CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

7 ·(Repeated Negligent Acts) . . 8 . 25. Respondentts license is subject tO disciplinary action under section 2234, subdivision

9 ( c ), in tha_t he committed repeated negligent acts duririg tlie care and treatment of Patients 1, 2, 3 ,·

10 and, 4, by failing to properly provide care during the prescription of controlled suhstances. The

11 circ~umstances are as follows:

12 26. .Complainant realleges paragraphs 16 through 23, and those paragraphs .are

13 incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.'

14 Patient 1

15 27. As noted above the certified medical records kept by the Respondent for Patient 1

16 were reviewed by the Medical Board of California. The vast majority of the clinic visits

17 documented in the certified medical records do not contain an objective assessment of pain,

18. functionality and a physical examination related to pain. On March 16, 2018, at the interview

· 19 ·with· the Medical Board of California Respondent acknow !edged he takes a history from the

20 patient but.doesn't perform a physical examination at each visit related to pain .. Th~ vast majority

21 of medical records kept by Responde1:1t for Pati'ent l do not contain a detailed treatment plan and

22 do not detap any attempt to wean Patient 1 off of controlled substances; Respondent's medical

. 23 records kept for Patient 1 do not contain a signed.medication. contract detailing informed consent.

24 regarding the risks, benefits~ and alternatives to chronic op_ioid use. Respondent's medical records

25 I II

26

27

28

. · 6 Commonly referred to the "holy trinity''. . . https://www.pharmacytimes.com/contributor/jeffrey-fudin/2014/09/the-perfect-storm-opioid-risks-and-the-holy-trinity · ·

10


1 kept for Patient 1 do not evidence a periodic r~view of her success or failure on chronic pain

2 . management therapy as it relates to a treatment plan.

3 Patient 2

4 28. The Medical Board obtained Patient 2's certified medical records maintained by

5 Respondent froin February 5_, 2013,_ to February 15, 201"7, On February 5, 2013, Respondent

6 documented that he performed a compl_ete physical on Patie~t 2. Respondent documented that

7 Patient 2 reported he was taking Vicodin (1 ~tablets per day) and soma as needed. Respondent

8 documented that Patient 2 was trying to eliminate the use of his Vicodin prescription.

9 Respondent documented that Patient 2's right and left lower extremities we_re normal as part of

1 O the musculoskeletal examination .. Respondent documented that Patient 2 suffered from

11 gastrointestinal conditions, hyperlipodemia, and kidney issues. Respondent didnit document th~t

12 Patient 2 suffered from pain at that visit. Respondent prescribed 60 tablets of 10/325 mg. Vicodin

13 and 30 tablets of 350 m~. carisoprodol to Patient 2 on or about February 5, 2012. Respondent did

14 not document a treatment plan for controlled substances when he prescri_bed controlled ·substances

15 to Patient 2. ·Respondent did document in later progress !).Otes that Patient 2 suffered from chronic

16 back pain and avasc~lar necrosis of the hips.

17 29. On a continuing basis starting on February 5, 2012,through December !"5, 2015,

18 Respondent prescribed carisoprodol and Vicodin to Patient 2. For example, between February 9, . . .

19 2015, and September 16, 2015,·Respondent prescribed 540 tablets of 10/325 mg. Vicodin and 660

20 tablets of carisoprodol to Patient 2. The medical records kept for Patient 2 by Respondent . .

21 between February 5, 2012, and September 16, 2015, fail to document a treatment plan for chronic

22 pain management, including goals, and a ·periodic review of that treatment plan. The records kept

23 for Patient 2 by Resp,ondent between February 5, 2012, and September 16, 2015,,fail to C<?ntain a

24 narcotics contract that specifically outlines informed consent, including the risks, benefits, and

25. alternatives to chronic opio_id and Soma use. Despite providing a medical indi~atlon for the use of

26 opiates and carisoprodol, Respondent failed to do~ument in the vast.majority of medical records·

27 between February 5, 2012, and Sept~mber 16,.201.5,.apain assessment, an examination of Patient

28 2's back and hips, or provide a statement regarding whether opiate therapy had imprqved Patient

11

(JAMES LEWIS STANTON, M.D.) ACCUSATION NO. 800-2016-027929-

1 2's functional status. At his interview with the Medical Board on March 16, 2018, Respondent

2 admitted he could have done a better job "quantifying the pain" and having."entry and exit

3 s'trategies" as it related to Patient 2 's pain managemep.t care.

4 Patient 3.·

5 30. The Medical Board obtained Patient 3's certified medical records maintained by

6 Respondent from August 16, 2013, to .November 17, 2016. Respondent terminated Patient 3 's

7 care on November 17~ 2016. On_ August 16, 2013, Respondent documented a complete physical

8 examination of Patient 3. Respondent noted that Patient 3 was taking Norco and prednisone.

9 Respondent documented thatPatient'3 suffered from Rheumatoid Arthritis. Respondent

IO documented that P~tient 3 had arthritic deformities in his upper extremities, and a swollen lower

11 right extremity. On July 17, 2013, and October 4, 2013, Patient 3 filled prescriptions for 160

12 tablets of 10/325 mg. Norco that were prescribed by Respondent. The August 16, 2013, note

13 doesn't contain a treatment plan for chronic opiate therapy.

14 31. Respondent continued to prescribe controlled substances to Patient 3 until November

15 2016. For example, between August 2, 2016, and November 23, 2016, Respondent prescribed or

. 16 re-filled the following controlled substances to Patient 3.

17

18

19

20

. ·21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Date Filled

August 2, 2016

August is, 2016

August 23, 2016

September 6, 2016

September 15; 2016

September 16, 2016

September 23, 2016

October 9, 2016

October 17, 2016

October 23, 2016 .

Prescription .. Quantity

Diazepam 60 tablets

Norco 160 tablets

Ambien 30tablets

Diazepam 60 tablets

Fentanyl Patch 10 patches .

Norco 160 tablets ·

Ambien 30 tablets

Diazepam 60 tablets :

Norco 160 tablets

Ambien 30 tablets

12

Dosage Schedule

Smg. IV

10/325 mg. II

lOmg. IV

Smg. IV

25 incg./hr. II

10/325 mg. II

IO mg .. IV

Smg. IV

10/325 mg. II

10 mg. IV


2

3

4

5

6

Date Filled . November 8, 2016

N~·vember 15, 2016

N.ovember·15, 2016

November 23, 2016

Prescription

Diazepam

Fentanyl Patch.

Norco

· Ambien

Quantity· Dosage Schedule t

60 tablets 5 mg. IV


160 tablets· 10/325.mg. II

30 tablets· lOmg. IV

7 32. In addition to the pre~criptions above, Respondent had first started prescribing similar

8

9

10

11

12

prescriptions offentanyl, Norco, and'Ambien in July 2015 .. In May 2016, Respondent began ·

prescribing diazepam on a monthly basis. Assuming that PatieD;t 3 .was using the.fentanyl patch . . . .

(25 mcg./hr.) and.Norco (50 mg. ofhydrocodone a day) as prescribed he had an.MED of 110

while also consuming two sedatives, diazepam ahd Ambien: Respondent documented th~t he

prescribed fentanyl to treat Patient 3 's rheumatoid arthritis. ·

13 33. On March 24, 2016, Respondent·documented that he saw Patient 3 for a complete

• 14 . physical examination. Respondent documented that Patient 3 was taking Ambien, fentanyl,

15

16

. 17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Norco, and Valium. Respondent documented that Patient 3.denied back pain, joint pain, joint

swelling, muscle pain, muscular weakness, and neck pain. Respondent doc·umented that Patient 3

denied fatigue, muscular weakness, and loss of balance. Respondent documented that Patient 3

denied anxiety, depression; difficulty coping, and difficulty sleeping. Respondent documented . . '

that Patient J had joint deformi~ies from rheumatoid arthritis in his upper extremities but didn't

d~cument tenderness as part of the musculoskeleta~ examination.· Respondent documented that

Patient 3 's mood was normal. In ·the assessment; Respondent document~d that Patient 3 had

rheumat-0id arthritis, persistent insomnia, and a history of total' knee and hip replacement.

Respondent documented a treatment plan, for Patient 3 's complaints unrelated to chronic pain

·therapy. Respondent did not document a treatment plan for chronic pain management, including

attempts to wean the patient off of opiates. Respondent did not document a narcotics contract

with informed consent, in particular explaining the risks of taking opiate medication~ while also

taking sedatives. Respondent did not do a pain assessment, functionality assessment or physical

examinat~on geared toward~ determining where the pain was coming from. Respondent did not .. 13


document that he had attempted to try a biological or non-biological disease-modifying

2 medieationto treat Patient 3 's rheum_atoid arthritis rather than p~escribing opiate medications.

3 34. In addition to the 'allegations set forth above, a review of the medical records between

4 August 16, 2013, to November 17, 2016, showed that Respondent·failed to document a narcotics

5 _contract with informed consent explainlng the risks, benefits, and alternatives to chron~c opioid

6 use. The records do not cont~in a treatment pfan explaining why fentanyl was titrated ai:id why

7 Respondent continued to prescribe diazepam and Ambien to Patient 3. The vast majority of the.

8 records don't contain a pain assessment, functionality ass_essment, and physical examination of

9 Patient 3 's body as it relates to the sources of pain. Respondent admitted at his subject"interview

10 with the Medical Board on March 16, 201°8, when he was asked what h~ ~ould do differently·

11 ··regarding Patient 3 's chronic pain care· by stating he wol;lld have paid, "more attention to the level

12 of pain ·that he hlitd, try to document it better."

13. Patient 4

14 3 5. The Medical Board of California reviewed over a thousand pages of certified medical

15 records related to Patient 4. Patient 4 had been Respondent's patient for a significant pedod of

16 time prior to January 1, 2012~ On February 2, 2012, Respondent prescribed 270 tablets of 10/325

17 mg. hydrocodone with acetaminophen to Patient 4. The 270 tablets of Norco were to last 90 days.

18 . He provided three refills with ·the prescriptions. ·The prescription was refilled on April 29, 2012

19 after t~o months~ on November 79? 2012, ~d February 5, 2013. On May 21, 2013, Respondent

20 issued a new prescription for 270 pills_ of 10/325 mg. hydrocodone with acetaminophen to Patient

21 4. Respondent again authorized three refills. On November 28, 2012, Respondent saw Patient 4

· 22 in his office for back pain. Respondent noted that an MRI of the lumbar spine showed

23 arthropathy, spinal stenosis, some recess steno~is, and a small disc hernation. Respondent

24 documented that patie~t suffered from leg pain. Respondent noted that she.had been off work for

25 a month. Prior to November 28, 2012, Re.spondent had been prescribing Norco and Soma to

26 Patient 4. Respondent noted in his assessment th_at she had spinal stenosis and suffered from

27 diabetes. Respondent documented a plan which included filling out forms, making copies of.

28 records and referring Patient 4 to another provider. Despite previously prescribing controlled

14


:• . 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

substances and doing a review of Patient 4 's back pain, Respondent did not perform a physical

examination, perform a pain assessment, or docllinent that he·was prescribing controlled

s_ubstances .. Respond_ent did not document a treatment p"lan for chronic pain therapy. Respondent

prescribed and Patient 4 fill~d 270 tablets of 10/325 mg. Norco, 60 tablets of2 mg. lorazepam,

and 90 tablets of350 mg. carisoprod9l on or about November 29, 2012. The medical records

appear to be missing a narcotics· contract .that docum.ents informed ~onsent, in particular the risks,

benefits, and alternatives to prescribing an opiate along with two sedatives. The medical record

from November 28, 2012, does not identify why Patient 4 was being prescribed lorazepain.

36. On December 13, 2012, Respondent documented seeing Patient 4 in clinic for a

. follow-up on her back pain. Respondent noted that she was off work, and needed employment

forms filled. There is no mention of Respondenfs controlled substance prescripti~ns, no

documentation ·of a pain assessment, and no docum_entation of a treatment plan for controlled

substanc~s therapy. There is no documentation regarding the lorazepam prescriptions. According

to pharmacy records, Patient. 4 refilled the lorazeparn _prescription on D~cember 8, 2012. ·On

December 28, 2012, Respondent documented seeing Patient 4 in c'linic for a follow-up to a

December 23, 2012, hospitalization. Patient4 was treated for a sudden onset of dyspnea, chest . .

pain, and .clamminess. The Patient 4 was treated for a suspected pulmonary embolism although

her computed tomography' scan was inconclusive: Re.spondentfailed to document performing a

pain as~essment,_ a· chronic paint treatment plan, or perform a physical_ examination related to

Patient 4's current level of pain. Respondent contiii.ued to prescribe controlled substances to

Patient 4 through 2015.

37. 01i. July 28, 2015,'Respondent prescribed 360 pills of 10/325 mg. hydrocodone with

acetaminophen and 180 pills of 350 mg. carisoprodol to Patient 4. The cadsoprodol prescription

contained three refills. Patient 4 filled the two prescriptions on August .4, 2015, and refilled the

carisoprodoi"on September 7, 2015, and November·6, 2015. On July 28, 2q15, Respondent

documented seeing Patient 4 in clinic. Respondent document~d that Patient 4 has lower back pain

radiating into her legs and was taking pain pills as needed. Respondent docult1ented performing a

·physical examination of Patient 4's knees, back and hips. Respondent documented. that his plan

15

(JAMES LEWIS STANTON, M.D.) ACCUSATION NO. 800-2016-027929 r

was to presciibe 320 pills of 10/325 mg. hydrocodone and 180 pills of carisoprodol. He also

2 referred her for additional xrays and an MRl. Despite having been pr~scrib~d carisoprodol arid

3 hydrocodone with acetan:iinophen to Patient 4 on a regular basis for the past 3 years, Respondent

4 did not perform a pain assessment, did not document a treatment plan for chronic pain therapy,

5 did not perform a·periodic review of the effectiveness of the ~ontrolled substances prescriptions;

6 and did not document a narcotk ·contract setting forth the risks, benefits; .and alternatives to

7 chronic pain management. Respondent did not document that he provided Patient 4 an increased

8 warni~g regarding the concomitant use of opiates and muscle relaxers at the same time.

9· 38. Respondent pre·scribed another 360 pills of 10/325 mg. hydrocodone with ·

. 10 acetaminophen and 180.pills ~f350 mg. carisoprodol on October 23, 2015, to Patient 4 ..

11 Respondent documented seeing Patient 4 ill clinic on October 23, 2015. Respondent noted that

12 Patient 4 was present to discuss medications and that she needed another ninety-day supply .of

13 meds fr.om "mailaway." No physical examination of Patient 4 was documented, no' pain

14 assessment was documented, no treatment plan'was documented aside from refilling medications,

15 and µo periodic review was performed regarding whether or not the controlled substances were

16 benefiting this patient. · .

17 39. In addition to the prescriptions and office visits described above, a.review of the

18 medical records between January 2012 and January 2016 showed that Respondent failed to

19 document a narcotics contract with Patient 4 that set forth the risks, benefits, and alternatives to

20 pain therapy, Respo.ndent failed to 01:itline a treatment plan for chronic pain management therapy

21 . and discuss the possibility of weaning the patient off opiates over time, Respondent failed to

22 adequately and regularly _perform pain assess!Ilents, functionality assessments, and physical

-23 examination of the areas on Patient 4's body that were causing her pain.

24 40. Respondent ~ommitted the following repeate~ negligent acts during the care of

25 Patients 1, 2, 3, and 4:

26 a.) · Respondent failed to adequately perform and/or document performing physical

27 examinations and objective pain assessments on Patient 1 despite prescribing ~ontrolled

28 substances; ·

,16 (JAMES LEWIS STANTON, M.D.) ACCl!SATION NO. 800-2016-027929

b.) Respondent failed to adequately perform and/or document performing physical

2 examinations and objective pain assessments on Patient 2 despite prescribing controlled

3 substances; -

4 c.) . Respondent failed to adequ~tely perform and/or documerit performing physical

5 examinations and objective pain assessqients on Patient 3 despite prescril?ing controlled·

6 substances;

7· d.) Respondent failed to a4equately perform and/or docun1erit P.erforming physical

8 eicaminations and objective pain assessments on Patient 4 de.spite prescribing c~mtrolled

9 substances;

10 e.) Responden~ failed to perform and/or docum~nt perfonning a treatment plan ·

11 with stated goals and objectives for Patient 1 including pain assessments, functionality

12 assessments; and goals to minimize chronic pain therapy despite prescribing c~ri.trolled

13 substances;

14 f.) Respondent failed to p~rform and/or document perfmming a treatment plan

15 with stated goals and objectives for Patient_2 including. pain assessments, functionality

16 assessments, and goals to ~inimize chronic pain therapy despite prescribi~g controlled

17 substances; . .

18 g.) Respondent failed to perform and/or document performing a treatment plan

19 with stated ~oals and objectives for Patient.3 including pain assessments, ~cti?nality

20 assessments, and goals to minimize chronic p~in thei!:l.PY despite pr_escribing controlled ·

21 substances;

22 h.) Respondent failed to perform and/or document.performin,g a treatment plan

23 with stated goals and objectives for Patient 4 including pain assessments, functionality

24 assessments, and goals to minimize chronic pain therapy despite prescribing controlled

25 substances;

26 i.) Respondent failed 'to create and/or document creating a narcotics contract

27 setting fortl;t informed consent to provide pain management therapy to Patient 1;

28 j.) Respondent failed to create and/or document creating a narcotics contract

17

(JAMES LEWIS STANTON, i\:1.D.) ACCUSATION NO. 800-2016-027929

setting forth informed consent to provide pain management therapy to Patient 2; .

2 k.) Respondent failed to create and/or document creating a .narcotics contract

3 setting forth informed consent to provide pain management therapy to Patient 3;

4 . 1.) ' Respondent failed to create .and/or document creating a narcotics contract

5 setting forth informed consent to provide pain management therapy to Patient 4;.

6 m.) Respondent failed to perform and/oi: document performing a periodic review ..

7 and ongoi°:_g monitoring o.f Patient l's progress on chronic pain therapy;

8 n.) Respondent failed to perfonn and/or document p~rfonning a periodic review

9 and ongoing monitoring:or Patient 2~s progress on chronic pain therapy;

10 o.) Respondent failed to perfonn and/or document performing a periodic review

11 and ongoing monitoring of Patient 3's progress oh chronic pain therapy;

12 p.) · Res~ondent .failed to perform and/or document performing a periodic review

i3 and ongoing monitoring of Patient 4's progress·on chronic pain therapy;

14 THIRD CA USE FOR DISCIPLINE

15 (Inadequate and Inaccurate Medical Records)

16 41. Respondent's license is subject to disciplinary action µnder section 2266 of the Code

17 in that he kept inadequate a_nd inaccurate ~edical records while prescribing co~trolled substance~

18 to Patients 1, 2, 3, ~nd 4. The circumstances are as follows:

19 42. Complainant realleges paragraph~ 16 through 40, and those paragraphs are

20 incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.

21 I I I

22 ///

23 II I

24 11 I

25 II I

26 I I I

27 I I I

28 I I I

18

(JAMES LEWIS STANTO~, M.D.)ACCUSATlQN NO. 800-2016-027929

PRAYER

2 · WHEREFORE, Complainant requests that a _hearing be held on the matters h.erein alleged,

3 and th~t following the hearing, the Medical Board of California issue a decision:

1. Revoking or suspending Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate Number G 30530,

5 issued to James Lewis Stanton, M.D.; ·.

6 2. Revoking, suspending or denying approval of James Lewis Stanton, M.D.'s authority

7 to s_upervise :physician assistants and advanced practice nurses; . .

8 3.. Ordering James Lewis Stanton, M.D., if placed on probation; to pay the Board the

9 costs of probation moni_toring; and

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

11

12 DATED:· August 28 ,. 2018

13

14

15

16 FR2018102165 ·

17 13186649.doc

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26.

27

28

K Executive Director Medical Board of California Department of Consumer Affairs State of California Complainant

19 .

(JAMES LEWIS STANTON, M.D.) A CCU SA TION NO. 800-2016-0279~9

medical board of california department of consumer …4patientsafety.org/documents/stanton, james...

Documents