| Complaint: | Complaint 20-31 |
|---|---|
| Respondent: | Jesse Baxter |
| Premises: | Mile Hi Animal Hospital |
The complainant blames Baxter and Mile High Animal Hospital for the death of her wolf. She tells us that Baxter was the only person who was supposed to do the surgery and take care of her wolf, but that she believes the wolf was neglected; she mentions an infection that came back even though she gave all the prescribed medications. She states that she only had one phone conversation after the fact with Baxter who told her that the wolf may have died from cancer. There is also a rather heartbreaking letter sent directly to Baxter after the phone conversation that fills in a few blanks. It appears there was some sort of surgery with a jaw that was infected and that the complainant has concerns too much of the procedure was delegated to an assistant. It also appears that the wolf went downhill shortly after the procedure and disputes the length of time before she informed Baxter regarding the death of the wolf.
Baxter's response tells us that the incident in question was a dental. She tells us that the complainant signed the standard disclaimer for procedures. She says that the next time the complainant came to the hospital with a new pet (apparently for a free exam with another vet paid for by the Yavapai Humane Society) she did not mention that the wolf had died. According to Baxter the complainant did not mention the death until five weeks after the wolf died (contrary to what the complainant claims). She also says that there was no infection and that the wolf was fine. She then goes on to levy a variety of attacks against the complainant herself. She states that far from being a wolf, the animal in question was a German shepherd mix. She also says that the complainant just needs to blame someone because of the complainant's own failings in not seeking out the proper medical attention for the animal; she says that the complainant has spent six months harassing her about the incident and that the only neglect she sees is on the part of the complainant for not bringing her animal back in.
The Investigative Committee's exhaustive research kept this one short and sweet: "The Committee discussed that they did not feel the dental procedure had anything to do with the death of the dog."
| Source: | December 12, 2019 PM Investigative Committee Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| Jesse Baxter | Respondent |
| Roll Call: | |
| Adam Almaraz | Aye |
| Amrit Rai | Aye |
| Brian Sidaway | Aye |
| Cameron Dow | Absent |
| William Hamilton | Aye |
| Result: | Passed |
| Source: | January 1, 2020 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| Proposed By: | Nikki Frost |
| Seconded By: | Jessica Creager |
| Roll Call: | |
| Christina Bertch-Mumaw | Absent |
| Darren Wright | Aye |
| J Greg Byrne | Absent |
| Jane Soloman | Aye |
| Jessica Creager | Aye |
| Jim Loughead | Aye |
| Nikki Frost | Aye |
| Robyn Jaynes | Aye |
| Sarah Heinrich | 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.