| Complaint: | Complaint 22-32 |
|---|---|
| Respondent: | Chris Simpson |
| Premises: | BluePearl Peoria |
| Related: | 21-98, 22-31 |
This complaint was opened by the board as part of an investigation into triage practices in the wake of a previous complaint, 21-98. A dog went from a Banfield (a Mars PetCare brand) to a BluePearl (another Mars PetCare brand) and dropped dead while muzzled as his veterinarian was discussing a treatment plan. The complainants in the original case suggest that the dog had been in there for hours prior to even being seen.
Simpson's response states that he examined the dog while muzzled and noted dehydration and lethargy. Aside from that "he otherwise did not have abnormal findings In the respiratory system or within the abdomen," so he contacted the complainants and told them of the tests he wanted to run. While he was doing that he was notified that the dog had collapsed; they commenced CPR and other measures, and while no food was found during intubation, he was suspicious of an acute aspiration event. He also notes that the dog was muzzled at the time of collapse and the staff waited to be clear of the dog before even removing the muzzle.
Half of Simpson's response is targeted at the original complainant (recalling that this particular one was opened by the board on its own initiative). He stated that the complainant was initially nice to get along with until they told him about his dog collapsing; he became angry and BluePearl staff wanted to call the police, but Simpson allegedly talked them down from calling the cops. He also said it "was difficult to get him to participate in making medical decision" and was also stubborn about stopping CPR when even when it wasn't doing any good. He notes the complainant "expressed distrust of us and me in particular and the expectation that we would cover our asses." Apparently the complainant consented to a necropsy and then drove off. (Reading along at home, if anything, it seems like the complainant might have been too polite to these people.)
There's no Investigative Committee report; this went directly to the Board and subsequently dismissed.
| Source: | October 10, 2021 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| David Stoll | Respondent Attorney |
| Proposed By: | Nikki Frost |
| Seconded By: | Jane Soloman |
| Roll Call: | |
| Darren Wright | Nay |
| J Greg Byrne | Absent |
| Jane Soloman | Aye |
| Jessica Creager | Nay |
| Jim Loughead | Nay |
| Nikki Frost | Aye |
| Robyn Jaynes | Nay |
| Sarah Heinrich | Absent |
| Violations: | |
| ARS 32-2232 (11) Malpractice | |
| Result: | Failed |
| Source: | October 10, 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 | Nay |
| Jessica Creager | Aye |
| Jim Loughead | Nay |
| Nikki Frost | Nay |
| Robyn Jaynes | Aye |
| Sarah Heinrich | Absent |
| Result: | Failed |
| Source: | October 10, 2021 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| David Stoll | Respondent Attorney |
| Proposed By: | Jane Soloman |
| Seconded By: | Darren Wright |
| Roll Call: | |
| Darren Wright | Aye |
| J Greg Byrne | Absent |
| Jane Soloman | Aye |
| Jessica Creager | Aye |
| Jim Loughead | Nay |
| Nikki Frost | Aye |
| Robyn Jaynes | Aye |
| Sarah Heinrich | Absent |
| Result: | Passed |
| Source: | November 11, 2021 Board Meeting |
|---|---|
| People: | |
| Chris Simpson | Respondent |
| Proposed By: | Darren Wright |
| Seconded By: | Jessica Creager |
| Roll Call: | |
| Craig Nausley | Aye |
| Darren Wright | Aye |
| J Greg Byrne | Aye |
| Jane Soloman | Aye |
| Jessica Creager | Aye |
| Jim Loughead | Aye |
| Nikki Frost | Absent |
| Robyn Jaynes | Aye |
| 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.