Dental board subpoenas dentist’s records
Man accused of treating 82 patients while his license was suspended
The New Mexico Board of Dental Health is seeking records from a dentist accused of practicing without a license.
The board filed a motion through Assistant Attorney General Lori Chavez in Bernalillo County’s 2nd Judicial District Court on Nov. 15 ordering William Gardner to comply with a Sept. 4 subpoena.
According to the filing, the board received a formal complaint July 9 stating Gardner was practicing dentistry without a license. The complaint identified 82 people believed treated by Gardner without a license.
The filing claimed Gardner admitted during a May 11 deposition to practicing dentistry without a license while his license was suspended, but the board received a response from Gardner on July 27 denying all allegations.
In connection with its investigation, the board issued an investigative petition requesting Gardner provide all records in his possession relating to the 82 people he allegedly treated during the time his license was suspended.
According to a letter from Delta Dental to New Mexico Board of Dental Health Care compliance officer Vanessa Montoya dated July 9, Gardner’s license was suspended April 17 through June 7, when the dental board issued its “Agreement to Lift Suspension.”
During that time, Gardner submitted 82 claims of reimbursement for services performed, according to the letter from Delta Dental general counsel Sue E. Jenkins.
The dental board is seeking complete patient records to include clinical notes, consent forms/waivers, patient instructions, exam information, treatment plans, periodontal charts, patient correspondence, fee schedule, ledgers, billing, consent forms and all pre- and post-operative radiographs and photos.
Gardner, through his attorney Michael L. Danoff, filed a motion to quash and an objection to the subpoena Sept. 24.
The filing called the subpoena overly broad and did not seek specific information. It said the subpoena posed an undue burden on Gardner.
It said the subpoena requested information that may lead to disclosures of privileged or otherwise protected information that would not be fair to the patients involved to be released without their permission.
Gardner also voiced concerns about potential problems with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.
The board voted 5-0 to deny Gardner’s motion to quash.
Danoff said he could not comment on the case because it was pending.
Attempts to reach Chavez on Friday were unsuccessful.