The complainant writes a well-worded complaint regarding what she believes to be gross negligence
and intentional abuse; she is actually a veterinary technician. She begins by stating that her dog
was overdue for a dental and was able to get him in at Agape Animal Clinic for an initial exam.
She said the clinic seemed overwhelmed and unorganized but helpful. She waited for information for
over an hour and called to find out more, at which point she learned she would need to drop the dog
off for the day. She was later called to come pick up the dog and received no updates. She was then
told the x-ray machine was down. Finally she says she was sent home with the dog and some antibiotics;
she was told to expect a call. Days later she received an email from Coy stating that the office couldn't
reach her because they had the wrong phone number on file; she says her phone number was correct on
all the paperwork she got back from the clinic. She received a call from a technician, Chris, who said
they would be short-staffed but could do the dental. She dropped the dog off for the dental and had a
total of 10 extractions. She picked up her dog after the dental and he was totally limp and unresponsive
with a cone around him. She said she had never seen her dog like this and noticed he had severe swelling
and air under the skin; she drove him to AVECCC as an emergency case. Weinzierl, a veterinarian at AVECCC,
found the dog to have a tracheal tear, trauma and penetration to his sinus cavity, nasty icky discharge
in his lungs, and aspiration pneumonia. She also informed Chris about this and was told to expect a
call back from Coy; she says she never got one. The dog also began to have painful leg issues and was
later examined by Mosbacher, the dog's regular veterinarian; he allegedly said that he thought the
dog's leg was either "brutally twisted" or burned and also noticed burn marks on the dog's ear.
Coy gives us some medical background on the dog and describes a relatively uneventful dental. She
states that the tube she used seemed a little stiff. She also notes that her assistant, Lizzette,
checked the warming bags before putting them around the dog. She concedes that it's possible one
of her tools may have penetrated the dog's nasal cavity while removing a root, but she didn't see
any blood at the time. A month later, Lizzette allegedly told her she had accidentally torn the
dog's ear while plucking it during recovery; apparently the assistant panicked and applied some
tissue glue to the ear. She also blames the complainant for the alleged burns as she says there
was no mention of them on the original AVECCC report; she says the only thing they did was give
the dog a complementary nail trim while he was knocked out, far from brutally twisting the leg.
She's very sure they didn't happen in her office. She says that photos sent by Schaible (yet
another specialist the dog had to see after this adventure) showed severe injuries suggesting
the complainant wasn't taking very good care of the dog; she thinks perhaps the complainant put
the dog on a heating pad and burned him at home.
The Investigative Committee said that they could ignore the poor communication problems but found it
difficult to ignore "the dog's multiple injuries, including the tracheal tear, SQ emphysema, the nasal
cavity penetration, the thermal burns and wound by the ear." They also state the staff was left
unsupervised to recover the animal, the staff injured the animal and lied about it, and Coy didn't
know that it even happened. They also think too much air was used to inflate the tube and led to a
tracheal tear. They then point out that if fluid bags are heated in the microwave and placed on a
sensitive part of your anatomy, you could get burned! They found violations of gross incompetence,
gross negligence, and malpractice. The Board disagreed and only kept a single violation of malpractice.
The penalty for what even a veterinary technician described as "intentional abuse," you wonder? Four hours
of continuing education in anesthesia, four hours of continuing education in medicalrecord keeping, and
a $500 civil penalty payable to the Board.
ARS § 32-2232 (11): Gross Incompetence; any professional misconduct or unreasonable lack of professional skill in the performance of professional practice - the dog was recovered by an unsupervised, unskilled staff member which resulted in injuries to the dog.
ARS § 32-2232 (11): Gross negligence; treatment of a patient or practice of veterinary medicine resulting in injury, unnecessary suffering or death that was caused by carelessness, negligence or the disregard of established principles or practices -the dogsustained multiple injuries while in Respondent's care (tracheal tear, thermal burn, and wound at the ear).
ARS § 32-2232 (11): Malpractice; treatment in a manner contrary to accepted practices and with injurious results with respect to endotracheal tube placement resulting in a tracheal tear and allowing an unskilled staff member recover the dog without supervision which resulted in injury to the dog.
A.R.S. § 32-2232 (11) Malpractice treatment in a manner contrary to accepted practices and with injurious results. Whether direct or indirect supervision occurred, Respondent was responsible to ensure the dog recovered from anesthesia as expected. The SQ emphysema was not noticed nor the extreme sedation the dog experienced. Additionally, the dog obtained thermal burns as a result of a warming device used under Respondent's care.
Penalties:
Probation (1 year)
Continuing education (4 hours in anesthesia)
Continuing education (4 hours in medical record keeping)
Civil penalty ($500)
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.