Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 03-08-2019
Case Style:
Mark Wagner vs. Missouri State Board of Nursing
Case Number:
Judge: Mark D. Pfeiffer
Court: MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS WESTERN DISTRICT
Plaintiff's Attorney: David F. Barrett
Defendant's Attorney: Kevin Hall, Associate General Counsel - Missouri State Board of Nursing
Description:
MoreLaw Suites - Legal Suites and Virtual Offices
The Best Places In Downtown Tulsa To Practice Law
406 South Boulder and 625 South Denver - 918 - 582-3993
The Best Places In Downtown Tulsa To Practice Law
406 South Boulder and 625 South Denver - 918 - 582-3993
Mr. Mark Wagner (“Wagner”) appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of Cole County, Missouri (“circuit court”), affirming the decision of the Missouri State Board of Nursing (“Board”), which determined that there was cause to discipline Wagner’s nursing license for his sexual advances toward a nineteen-year-old nurse aide coworker by offensively touching her on her buttocks, without invitation or permission, in a patient’s room while the patient was asleep. The Board determined that Wagner was subject to discipline because the definition of the battery offense to which Wagner pleaded guilty, as relevant to this appeal, involved moral turpitude. The Board suspended Wagner’s nursing license for six months, followed by three years’ probation, subject to terms and conditions.
Wagner petitioned for judicial review of the Board’s disciplinary order. The circuit court entered judgment, affirming the Board’s decision.
Wagner raises three points on appeal. In his first point, he asserts that the Board acted in excess of its statutory authority in that misdemeanor battery to which Wagner pleaded guilty in the District Court of Johnson County, Kansas, does not meet the requirements of section 335.066.16. In his second point, he contends that the Board’s decision was unsupported by competent and substantial evidence upon the whole record because the record does not include a copy of the Kansas statute that Wagner is alleged to have violated. In his third point, he avers that the Board acted in excess of its statutory authority in requiring him, as a disciplinary sanction, to comply with notice, practice, and reporting requirements for out-of-state practice, because the Board had no authority over his conduct subject to licensure in a sister state.
Outcome: AFFIRMED
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: