| Complaint: | Complaint 22-104 |
|---|---|
| Respondent: | Daniel Moezzi |
| Premises: | BluePearl Avondale |
The complainant says that she blames BluePearl for the "improper care, mishandling, and death" of her dog. She says that her dog was 10 years old and still acted like a puppy. He had a small neck wound that she brought in for stiches; she initially tried to find a mobile vet as her dog doesn't do well around stranges and can become aggressive at times. She went to BluePearl because they said they could see her right away and be out in a couple of hours; the dog was actually there for a total of 7 hours, and after 3 hours when asked to return the dog a veterinary technician refused. She grew concerned that her normally stressed and bitey dog wasn't being a problem for them, particularly with his separation anxiety.
Moezzi told her the dog had recovered fine. The dog was said to have elevated liver values and the dog's wound had maggots (she says she didn't see any the day before when cleaning the wound). The dog was returned to her by three technicians who wheeled him out on a gurney with a muzzle; the dog couldn't walk and was breathing strangely but she was told it was just the sedation. At home she noticed the one-inch wound was now a six-inch wound and only had six sutures holding it together; she also describes a lot of blood. She called Moezzi but he apparently thought nothing of her description. She also requested records that took days to receive, and she subsequently noticed a variety of problems in the records including the dog's weight as well as elevated heart rates and fever that weren't mentioned to her. The dog died at home five days later, and she states that once she broached the topic of a refund, BluePearl stopped talking to her completely.
Moezzi's response barely matches the complainant's account at all. We're told that the complainant was told there would be a long wait but she agreed to drop the dog off and go home. He also says that the dog was very obese but at least he was able to walk, and that he had a large neck wound with visible maggots. He relayed that the dog was stable but had a fever likely resulting from the infection, discussed the dog's obesity, and listened to the complainant's concerns about his bloated abdomen. The complainant was allegedly aware that it could take hours before they were able to work on the dog, and we're told that in addition to fixing the wound, they catheterized the dog to drain his full bladder; he recommended an internal medicine workup because of the dog's liver values on blood work. The wound itself was attended to and the dog was sent home. He says that everything was explained to the complainant, that she received all records in a timely manner, and that he implored her to bring the dog back as soon as he learned the dog was still just laying there days later. He also contests many of her claims about contacting BluePearl, saying there's no record of many of the alleged communications. He also says she's wrong about the size of the wound as multiple technicians concur it was six inches and not one inch.
The Investigative Committee had no serious concerns. They said that the complainant was confused about how the surgery would go, and that the maggots were hidden from view by being under the dog's matted hair. They also found it "credible" that Moezzi explained everything to the complainant. They mentioned they were "concerned" about the dog being returned on a gurney, but they said that he was a difficult dog to deal with and needed a muzzle; the dog could actually walk on his own, or so they were told and believe.
BluePearl franchises tend to rack up more than a few complaints; this one isn't even the strangest.
| Source: | August 8, 2022 AM Investigative Committee Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| Daniel Moezzi | Respondent |
| David Stoll | Respondent Attorney |
| Roll Call: | |
| Robert Kritsberg | Aye |
| Christina Tran | Aye |
| Carolyn Ratajack | Aye |
| Jarrod Butler | Aye |
| Steven Seiler | Aye |
| Result: | Passed |
| Source: | September 9, 2022 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| David Stoll | Respondent Attorney |
| Proposed By: | Craig Nausley |
| Seconded By: | Jim Loughead |
| Roll Call: | |
| Craig Nausley | Aye |
| Darren Wright | Aye |
| J Greg Byrne | Absent |
| Jane Soloman | Aye |
| Jessica Creager | Aye |
| Jim Loughead | Aye |
| Melissa Thompson | Aye |
| Nikki Frost | Aye |
| Robyn Jaynes | Absent |
| Result: | Passed |
The primary source for the above summary was obtained as a public record from the Arizona State Veterinary Medical Examining Board. You are welcome to review the original records and board meeting minutes by clicking the relevant links. While we endeavor to provide an accurate summary of the complaint, response, investigative reports and board actions, we encourage you to review the primary sources and come to your own conclusions. In some cases we have also been able to reach out to individuals with knowledge of specific complaints, and where possible that information will be included here.