Quackwatch Home Page ||| Article about Pinkus

STATE OF MINNESOTA, COUNTY OF RAMSEY
BEFORE THE MINNESOTA BOARD OF CHIROPRACTIC EXAMINERS

In the Matter of Michael R. Pinkus, DC
License No. 1994

STIPULATION AND ORDER

WHEREAS, on or about May 31, 1990, the Minnesota Board of Chiropractic Examiners (Board) instituted the above-captioned matter by serving upon Michael R. Pinkus, DC (Respondent) a document entitled, "Notice Of Conference With Complaint Panel," a copy of which Notice is attached hereto and made a part hereof; and

WHEREAS, on June 19, 1990, Respondent and his attorney and representatives of the Board met in a conference to discuss the allegations set forth in the Notice; and

WHEREAS, based upon the conference discussion, the parties wish to resolve this matter without the necessity and expense of a contested case bearing by entering into the instant Stipulation;

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Respondent and the Board as follows:

A. During all times material herein, Respondent has been and now is subject to the jurisdiction of the Board from which be holds a license to practice chiropractic in the State of Minnesota.

B. If the Board in its discretion does not approve this Stipulation, it shall be deemed withdrawn and of no evidentiary value and shall not be introduced or relied on by either party; except that Respondent agrees that, should the Board reject this Stipulation and if this case proceeds to hearing, Respondent will assert no claim that the Board was prejudiced by its review and discussion of this Stipulation or of any records relating hereto.

C. Respondent expressly waives formal hearing on all facts and legal conclusions referenced herein and any and all procedures before the Board relative to said facts and conclusions to which he might otherwise be entitled by law.

D. Respondent does not contest the facts and conclusions hereinafter following and giants that the Board may, for purposes of its proceedings relating to this Stipulation, consider the following as true:

1. Respondent was born in 1956. He graduated from Northwestern College of Chiropractic in 1983 and was licensed by the Board the same year.

2. Respondent practiced chiropractic in St. Louis Park, Minnesota, -from 1984 through 1989. He moved to Florida in January 1990 and is not presently practicing.

3. At the conference with the Board's representatives on June 19, 1990, Respondent stated, among other things, substantially as follows with respect to the several allegations set forth in the Notice of Conference:

a. Most of the alleged recordkeeping deficiencies occurred only a short time after Respondent began practicing and may be attributed to his lack of experience. As Respondent's practice evolved, he devised better forms and maintained more complete and accurate records.

b. Respondent's billing practices were generally satisfactory, although errors did occasionally occur.

c. Patients' requests for the transfer of their records, including x-rays, were normally honored in a timely fashion, The instances of withholding cited in the Notice of Conference were unfortunate exceptions.

d. All multiple, single day adjustments which Respondent conducted were justified on the basis of the patients' acute conditions.

4. Proof at hearing of one or more of the allegations set forth in the Notice of Conference would empower the Board to take disciplinary action against Respondent's license and to assess Respondent the cost of the proceeding. Minn. Stat. § 148.10, subd. 1 and subd. 3(c).

E. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that upon this Stipulation the Board may forthwith adopt and implement the following Order:

1. At such time as Respondent resumes the practice of chiropractic in the State of Minnesota, be shall be on probation with the Board for two years. Periods of residency or practice outside of Minnesota will not apply to the expiration of the probationary period. During probation, the following terms and conditions shall apply;

a.1) Respondent shall make and maintain complete, accurate, current, legible, and readily retrievable records on every patient he sees in a professional capacity. At a minimum, each such record shall include:

a) The patient's health history;
b) Respondent's examination findings, including findings relative to any and all chiropractic, neurological and orthopedic tests;
c) The results of any and all laboratory tests;
d) Any and all x-rays of the patient taken by Respondent and x-ray reports;
e) Respondent's diagnosis;
f) A treatment plan prepared by Respondent;
g) Progress notes based on the SOAP format;
h) Any and all insurance billings and receipts; and
i) A ledger card, listing the dates of all visits by the patient, all services provided on each visit, and the dollar amount charged for each service provided.

2) For purposes of verifying Respondent's compliance with the foregoing requirements, Respondent shall promptly provide copies of any and all patient records which may be requested by the Board pursuant to this Order or Minn. Stat. §148.104.

b. Any and all requests for the transfer of patient records, including x-rays, made in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 144.335 shall be complied with by Respondent within ten (10) days of the receipt of the request, regardless of the status of the patient's account.

c. Not less frequently than monthly, Respondent shall provide an itemized written statement to every patient whose account includes any unpaid balance.

2. Respondent is hereby assessed a civil penalty of $5,000. Respondent shall cause the Board to receive a certified check, cashier's check or money order in the amount of one-fifth of the assessment ($1,000) not later than ten (10) days from the date of this Order. The check or money order shall be made payable to the Minnesota Board of Chiropractic Examiners. The balance of the assessment ($4,000) shall be due and paid immediately at such time as Respondent resumes the practice of chiropractic in Minnesota.

3. Respondent shall notify the Board in writing immediately upon any resumption of his practice in Minnesota.

4. If Respondent violates or fails to fully comply with any part of this Order, the same shall constitute the violation of a lawful order of the Board within the meaning of Minn. Stat. § 148.10, subd. 1(10) (1988) and grounds for disciplinary action by the Board. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the existence of any such violation or circumstance shall be determined in accordance with the procedures for contested cases set forth in the Minnesota Administrative Procedure Act and rules of the Minnesota Office of Administrative Hearings; provided that this Order and the Stipulation of which it is a part shall be admissible into evidence without objection at any contested case bearing.

5. This Order and the Stipulation of which if is a part shall be deemed to be a public document.

F. IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that this Stipulation shall not in any way limit or affect the authority of the Board to initiate contested case proceedings against Respondent on the basis of any act, conduct, or omission of Respondent occurring before or after the date of this Stipulation which is not directly related to the specific facts and circumstances or requirements set forth in paragraphs 1) and E hereof.

G. Respondent has voluntarily entered into this Stipulation without threat or promise by the Board or any of its members, employees or agents, and after consultation with and advice from Respondent's counsel.

H. This Stipulation contains the entire agreement between the parties, there being no other agreement of any kind, verbal or otherwise, which varies this Stipulation.

Dated: 2 Oct 1990

MICHAEL R. PINKUS, DC
Respondent

Upon consideration of this Stipulation and all of the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the terms of this Stipulation are adopted and implemented by the Board this 11th day of December , 1990.

MINNESOTA BOARD OF CHIROPRACTIC EXAMINERS
Wilma E. Behm, DC
President

Quackwatch Home Page ||| Article about Pinkus

This page was posted on June 6, 2002.