| Complaint: | Complaint 21-73 |
|---|---|
| Respondent: | C Renee Andrea |
| Premises: | Chaparral Veterinary Medical Center |
| Related: | 21-71, 21-72 |
This complaint follows from 21-71 but pertains to Andrea's involvement. It appears that Andrea was around in case she was needed to operate on the horse but wasn't needed; she was involved in follow-up discussions after the horse bled out in the complainant's trailer on the way home from Chaparral, of which she is co-owner.
Andrea says that she received a call from Liepman asking for her availability to perform surgery on the horse. She was around to assist Liepman doing her workup on the horse and running procedures but Liepman was the primary veterinarian on the case. She also relates that Moyer (the veterinarian who did the surgery) "energetically" said that she was finishing up on her current surgery and could handle working on the complainant's horse as well; she told everyone they were doing a great job and went home. She tells us that they have three boarded surgeons at their facility and aspire to be able to crack open a horse in 30 minutes from the onset of abdominal problems (see 21-71 for a mention of a Google review that claims one of their veterinarians cut a donkey's jugular vein during a trachea surgery). Andrea says she only spoke with the complainants once when she made a phone call after the horse had died. She noted that the photo she was shown had blood splatter rather than a pool of blood and that the complainants didn't want to listen to her experience about horses. She also said that they didn't want to pay the bill and told the complainant and his wife that they should have taken out insurance on their horse; she said that the clinic's insurance only comes into play if her employees were found to be at fault but states the care provided was exemplary. She also says that they are not overworked junior veterinarians; they're all board certified veterinarians and had a "junior" veterinarian monitoring the horse with round-the-clock access to them if needed. She also says that the veterinarians at the practice discussed the case and determined none of them did anything wrong. (There's no mention of the $3500 that David Stoll, frequent veterinary legal defender, allegedly offered to the complainant's wife.)
The Investigative Committee discussion is pasted from 21-71.
| Source: | June 6, 2021 AM Investigative Committee Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| C Renee Andrea | Respondent |
| David Stoll | Respondent Attorney |
| Roll Call: | |
| Carolyn Ratajack | Aye |
| Christina Tran | Absent |
| Jarrod Butler | Aye |
| Robert Kritsberg | Aye |
| Steve Seiler | Aye |
| Result: | Passed |
| Source: | July 7, 2021 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| David Stoll | Respondent Attorney |
| Proposed By: | Robyn Jaynes |
| Seconded By: | Darren Wright |
| Roll Call: | |
| 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.