College of Veterinarians of Ontario v Hussein Fattah, 2026 ONCVO 4

DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF VETERINARIANS OF ONTARIO

Indexed as: College of Veterinarians of Ontario v Hussein Fattah 2026 ONCVO 4

Decision date: 2026-03-24

BETWEEN:

THE COLLEGE OF VETERINARIANS OF ONTARIO

• and -

DR. HUSSEIN FATTAH

PANEL:

Dr. Sarah Thompson Chair, Professional Member

Dr. Sean Marshall Professional Member

Dr. Atul Pakhawala Professional Member

Dr. Michael Zigler Professional Member

Mr. Douglas Reynolds Public Member

Appearances:

Bernard LeBlanc and Carly Waisglass, Counsel for the College

Dr. Husssein Fattah, appearing on behalf of himself

Luisa Ritacca, Independent Legal Counsel to the Panel

Heard: February 2-4, 2026

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION

1. This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Panel”) on February 2, 2026, at the College of Veterinarians of Ontario (the “College”). The hearing was conducted by way of video conference and proceeded for three days.

The Allegations

2. The Panel received a Notice of Hearing (Exhibit #1), dated February 6, 2024, setting out allegations against the Member.

3. The background factual allegations and allegations of professional misconduct against the Member as stated in the Statement of Allegations appended to the Notice of Hearing are as follows:

Statement of Allegations

1. Dr. Hussein Fattah was, at all material times, a veterinarian licensed to practise veterinary medicine in Ontario. Dr. Fattah practised at Glebe Pet Hospital in Ottawa, Ontario.

The Facts

2. Butterscotch was an 11-year-old spayed female Dachshund/Chihuahua mix.

3. On July 17, 2020, Butterscotch was presented to Dr. Fattah after jumping off a couch two days previously. By that time Butterscotch was moving somewhat stiffly.

4. On examination, Dr. Fattah found no apparent abnormalities. Dr. Fattah prescribed Previcox, 57 mg tablet, to be administered 1/2 tablet once a day with food until finished. No diagnostic testing was performed, such as blood work or radiographs.

5. On July 24, 2020, Butterscotch did not eat her breakfast until later in the day and was not interested in dinner. On July 25, 2020, Butterscotch ate much less than usual as well.

6. On July 26, 2020, Butterscotch ate late in the afternoon and vomited twice.

7. On July 27, 2020, Butterscotch was lethargic and vomited twice. The owner called Dr. Fattah’s office but no appointments were available. Butterscotch was instead taken to an emergency hospital where she was found to be dull, responsive and alert. Her weight was listed as 4.98 kg.

8. A PCV (packed cell volume), and a TP (total protein) test was performed, following which Butterscotch was given fluids and an injection of Cerenia. She was also prescribed Cerenia, Omeprazole, Sucralfate and Gabapentin. Radiographs and complete blood work were recommended but not performed.

9. On July 28 and 29, 2020 Butterscotch was extremely drowsy and leaking urine.

10. Dr. Fattah saw Butterscotch again on July 30, 2020 and took a blood sample. Butterscotch had to be fed via syringe.

11. On July 31, 2020, Dr. Fattah reported the blood results to the client and indicated that Butterscotch had stage 3 kidney failure. He prescribed Hill’s kidney diet, Aventiclav and Famotidine and suggested that if Butterscotch did not improve by August 4, 2020, they should bring Butterscotch back to see him.

12. On August 1, 2020, Butterscotch was admitted to another emergency animal hospital for treatment of kidney failure. Butterscotch was discharged on August 5, 2020 with a diagnosis of stage 2 kidney failure.

13. On September 23, 2020, Butterscotch was seen at another hospital with severe azotemia.

14. Butterscotch was euthanized on October 1, 2020

Allegations of Professional Misconduct

15. On July 31, 2020, Dr. Fattah failed to develop an appropriate set of rule outs or properly assess and/or recommend appropriate diagnostic testing or treatment for Butterscotch.

16. In particular, given Butterscotch’s history and presentation on July 31, 2020, Dr. Fattah ought to have treated Butterscotch aggressively for kidney failure. Among other things, Dr. Fattah ought not to have only prescribed food and antibiotics in an anorexic patient with advanced renal failure.

17. Further, Dr. Fattah should have recommended:

a. further diagnostic testing;

b. re-hydration;

c. restriction of protein and phosphorus;

d. a plan to maintain caloric intake;

e. treatment to address acid/base and electrolyte abnormalities; and,

f. an urinalysis with a urine culture, especially before starting the antibiotic Aventiclav.

18. Further, Dr. Fattah failed to make proper records. Among other things:

a. his medical records for July 17, 2020 visit are inaccurate in that they did not accurately record the information provided to him by Butterscotch’s owner, nor did they accurately describe Butterscotch’s level of discomfort as explained to him by Butterscotch’s owner or as a result of his physical examination;

b. the records for the July 17, 2020 visit are inadequate in that they should contain more detailed findings and they should contain a description of the gait, posture of the patient, a neurologic exam and an indication of the absence or presence of pain;

c. the records should have an assessment of the patient;

d. the records should contain a record of communications regarding the blood work results with the owner;

e. the part of the record setting out the patient’s history (subjective and objective part of the record) is not separate from Dr. Fattah’s assessment, making the record difficult to understand; and

f. Dr. Fattah’s note that he “advised” x-ray and blood work and that the owner declined, is not accurate. Rather, he mentioned it to the client but did not recommend it.

19. Dr. Fattah thereby engaged in professional misconduct within the meaning of paragraphs 2 (failing to maintain the standards of practice of the profession), 27 (failing to make or retain the records required by the regulation) and 44 (an act or omission relevant to the practice of veterinary medicine that, having regard to the circumstances, would be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional) of section 17(1) of O. Reg. 1093 under the Veterinarians Act.

Member’s Plea

4. The Member denied the allegations set out in the Notice of Hearing.

Evidence of College Witnesses

Witness 1 – CS

5. CS testified that she was the primary caregiver of Butterscotch, a Dachshund/Chihuahua mix she had since 2009. She described Butterscotch as being very healthy and energetic prior to July 2020, with only four veterinary visits for events. Dr. Fattah was Butterscotch's regular veterinarian.

6. CS testified that on July 15, 2020, Butterscotch was sitting on the couch when she threw a Kong ball off the couch. Butterscotch jumped off, yelped, grabbed her ball, and seemed fine after that. By July 16, Butterscotch seemed stiff and was moving somewhat slowly, but CS was not overly concerned as this had happened before. She could pick Butterscotch up and touch her without any indication of pain. By July 17, Butterscotch was still stiff and moving slowly but was not worse, and CS brought her to see Dr. Fattah.

7. CS testified that Dr. Fattah was not overly concerned about Butterscotch and advised her not to let the dog jump anymore. Toward the end of the appointment, Dr. Fattah offered x-rays or bloodwork if Ms. Singh "wanted." CS asked what the best thing would be to do, and Dr. Fattah shrugged and said "no, you don't have to.” She took this to mean that the bloodwork and x-rays were not necessary. Dr. Fattah prescribed Previcox in a bottle, and CS did not receive any other advice or instruction about the medication.

8. CS described Butterscotch's deterioration from July 24 onwards. By that date, Butterscotch was not eating normally and was not herself. On July 26, Butterscotch vomited twice. On July 27, Butterscotch was lethargic and vomited again. CS called Dr. Fattah's office and mentioned that Butterscotch had started Previcox several days ago and asked whether the symptoms could be related to the medication. The veterinary technician said it did not sound like it would be related. No appointment was available, so CS took Butterscotch to the Ottawa Veterinary Hospital emergency room, where the staff indicated that the Previcox could be causing small gastrointestinal ulcers.

9. CS described her appointment at Ottawa Veterinary Hospital. She stated she was told that the signs exhibited by Butterscotch could be a side effect of the Previcox. The attending veterinarian recommended tests to assess for the possibility of gastrointestinal effects and CS consented to packed cell volume (PCV) and total protein (TP) blood testing. These tests did not support a diagnosis of blood loss, but CS understood that Butterscotch was dehydrated. CS further testified that she was sent home with medication for Butterscotch and told that the dog should be back to herself by the next day.

10. CS testified that Butterscotch did not improve over the following days. She returned to Dr. Fattah on July 30, where she again raised her concern that the symptoms had come on because of the Previcox. Dr. Fattah was dismissive of this idea and said they had to focus on going forward. Dr. Fattah took a blood sample. By this point, Butterscotch had to be fed via syringe as she was not eating.

11. CS testified that on July 31, Dr. Fattah called and said Butterscotch was in stage 3 kidney failure with a very high white blood cell count, and that this happened to older dogs and just came with older age. CS was shocked. Dr. Fattah prescribed a kidney diet and more medication. CS asked whether this was how a dog was supposed to look with kidney disease. Butterscotch was still very wobbly and not alert.

12. CS and her mother lost faith in Dr. Fattah and took Butterscotch to the Alta Vista Emergency Hospital on August 1. The veterinarian there told them that had they waited, Butterscotch may have started to have seizures and gave them a 50/50 survival prognosis. Butterscotch was hospitalized for several days and received aggressive treatment, including IV fluid therapy and an ultrasound of the kidneys. By August 5, Butterscotch was diagnosed with stage 2 kidney disease and was discharged.

13. CS described Butterscotch's subsequent decline. Butterscotch developed necrosis at the end of her tongue, eventually falling off on August 9. She had permanent kidney damage and was fed by syringe. By September 22, Butterscotch stopped eating and vomited several times. She was seen at the Kawartha Hospital and was assessed as having end-stage renal disease. The family was told Butterscotch would likely not survive more than ten days. Butterscotch was euthanized at home on October 1, 2020.

14. CS also testified regarding Dr. Fattah's records. She noted that the record stating the owner "declined" x-rays and bloodwork was a mischaracterization. She testified that Dr. Fattah did not "advise" or "recommend" these tests; rather, he said she could have them if she wanted and then implied that they were not necessary. She also noted inaccuracies in the records, including clarifying that Butterscotch had jumped off a couch, not fallen off a bed as contained in the medical records, and that she had told Dr. Fattah that Butterscotch was not in pain but was moving a little more slowly.

15. In cross-examination, Dr. Fattah challenged CS’s account of the x-ray and bloodwork discussion and suggested she had also declined bloodwork at the Ottawa Veterinary Hospital. CS denied this, explaining that the Ottawa Veterinary Hospital had recommended starting with a PCV/TP test to rule out internal bleeding, with further tests to follow if needed. Dr. Fattah also suggested that CS had resisted his advice because of cost, but the witness maintained her position throughout.

Witness 2 – CC

16. CC is the mother of CS. She testified that Dr. Fattah had been Butterscotch's regular veterinarian. CC was not present when Butterscotch jumped off the couch on July 15, 2020, and did not become directly involved until approximately July 31, when she attended Dr. Fattah's office with her daughter. CC testified that she had been pushing her daughter to get Butterscotch treated as the dog did not look right to her.

17. CC described the July 31 appointment with Dr. Fattah as very different from previous interactions. She testified that Dr. Fattah was very dismissive, practically pushed them out the door, and she felt dismissed and as though he wanted them to leave. When they asked him whether the change in Butterscotch's condition could be related to the medication, Dr. Fattah kept saying "don't go backwards." CC described it as a "bum's rush" and said Dr. Fattah was very dismissive and quite rude. The experience frightened her and prompted the decision to seek emergency care at Alta Vista Animal Hospital.

18. CC described the subsequent decline of Butterscotch, including the hospitalization at Alta Vista Animal Hospital, the development of necrotic tongue, and eventual euthanasia on October 1, 2020. She contrasted the experience with Dr. Fattah with every other veterinarian they dealt with, describing the other veterinarians as very professional and kind.

19. In cross-examination, Dr. Fattah asked CC why it took 15 days to convince CS to return for a re-check. CC explained that she had spoken with her daughter within a few days and that they had already attended the emergency hospital. CC stated that she could not answer what Dr. Fattah and CS had said to each other at the July 17 appointment as she was not present.

Witness 3 – Dr. Marco Mazzocco

20. Dr. Mazzocco is the co-owner of Campus Estates Animal Hospital with an emphasis in minimally invasive surgery. He was tendered as an expert witness by the College to offer opinion evidence with respect to the standards of practice in veterinary practice for small companion animals in the province of Ontario. There were no questions in cross-examination on his qualifications, and the Panel accepted him as an expert witness.

21. Dr. Mazzocco reviewed the records from Alta Vista Animal Hospital, Dr. Fattah, Claire Place Veterinary Hospice, Kawartha Veterinary Emergency Clinic, and Ottawa Veterinary Hospital. He prepared an initial report and a reply report in response to Dr. Cochrane's report. Dr. Mazzocco opined that the prescription dose of Previcox was a little higher than the normal dose but not totally unreasonable, and that the medication was not the cause of Butterscotch's kidney failure.

22. Dr. Mazzocco testified that Dr. Fattah failed to provide adequate follow-up care after Butterscotch's diagnosis of stage 3 kidney failure. Dr. Fattah had only prescribed food, an antacid, and antibiotics when the patient was severely ill and required aggressive management at the time the bloodwork results were received. Dr. Mazzocco opined that Dr. Fattah should have admitted the animal to a hospital, collected urine for urinalysis and urine culture and sensitivity, started antibiotics, administered anti-nausea medication, conducted sequential blood monitoring over a number of days, and developed a plan for adequate caloric intake. Dr. Mazzocco concluded that Dr. Fattah did not meet the standard of practice in this instance.

23. Regarding the medical records, Dr. Mazzocco expressed concern that Dr. Fattah had mischaracterized information from the owners. He testified that he would have expected more in the records regarding visual observations, an orthopaedic and neurologic examination, and that there was nothing noted in the records about communications with the owner regarding bloodwork.

24. In his reply report, Dr. Mazzocco addressed the IRIS classification for staging kidney disease, noting that two sequential set of bloodwork in a stable patient are required and that the IRIS classification cannot be used, by definition, in the circumstances presented.

25. In cross-examination, Dr. Fattah questioned Dr. Mazzocco about the SDMA value in Butterscotch's bloodwork from July 31, 2020. Dr. Mazzocco explained that the SDMA was an early detector of kidney disease but that in this situation, it was probably a false negative, and the other renal values, including significantly elevated urea numbers, overshadowed the SDMA value. Dr. Mazzocco also stated that Internal Medicine specialists would not look at SDMA in a patient with this type of presentation. Dr. Fattah also suggested that force-feeding Butterscotch could have been an appropriate option. Dr. Mazzocco expressly denied that force-feeding is a standard of practice of the profession. Dr. Mazzocco confirmed that treatment of Butterscotch was delayed at a minimum because of Dr. Fattah's failure to recommend aggressive treatment.

The Member’s Case

Witness 4 – Dr. Geoffrey Cochrane

26. Dr. Cochrane was called as a witness by the Member. He testified that he was in his 50th year of veterinary practice and had taught for 15 years at a local college. He had served six years on the complaints committee and one year on discipline. He had also been asked to provide expert opinions and to mentor members. Dr. Cochrane prepared an expert report dated May 8, 2023.

27. In cross-examination on his credentials, College counsel noted that Dr. Cochrane's report stated that it had been "compiled in support of" Dr. Fattah's case, rather than being an objective assessment. Dr. Cochrane acknowledged that he may have "embellished a little" and that he was not given proper guidance in writing the report. Dr. Cochrane was combative and antagonistic during cross-examination, fighting College counsel at nearly every question.

28. The College objected to qualifying Dr. Cochrane as an expert witness, submitting that his report and his demeanour clearly demonstrated bias and partisanship. The College relied on the Mohan criteria, which require the Panel to assess four threshold criteria: relevance, necessity, the absence of an exclusionary rule, and proper qualification.

29. The Panel sustained the objection. Dr. Cochrane's report was marked as Exhibit A and his curriculum vitae as Exhibit B, but he was not permitted to provide his opinion evidence at the hearing.

Witness 5 - The Member

30. Dr. Fattah testified on his own behalf. He stated that on July 17, 2020, Butterscotch presented having fallen off a couch and was in pain. He examined the dog and did not see anything of concern but noted a history of falling and eating garbage. He said he would have liked to take x-rays and perform bloodwork, but the owner declined. He prescribed an NSAID and said he did not think it was severe, but that because he was dispensing an NSAID, he believed bloodwork was advisable.

31. Dr. Fattah testified that he did not hear from the owner again until July 30, when he was told Butterscotch was not doing well. Before returning to Dr. Fattah, the owners had attended the emergency hospital, which Dr. Fattah said also did the minimum. The owner had started saying that the Previcox was the reason for the symptoms. Dr. Fattah took blood on July 30, and on July 31, the results showed severe infection and kidney issues. He stated that the SDMA was normal, so the kidney issues did not concern him, but the infection was concerning. He prescribed antibiotics and a kidney diet and told the owners to return by August 4 if Butterscotch did not improve. He never heard from the owners again.

32. In cross-examination, Dr. Fattah acknowledged that his record-keeping was not perfect, which he attributed to the difficulties of practising during the COVID-19 pandemic. He confirmed he had since taken a record-keeping module and recognized that his records were not complete. When pressed on his reliance on the SDMA value, Dr. Fattah maintained his position that a diagnosis of chronic kidney failure could be made without urinalysis or further bloodwork based on his experience, a position inconsistent with Dr. Mazzocco's expert evidence.

Decision and Reasons of the Panel

33. The Panel considered all of the evidence before it and made the following findings.

Credibility

34. The Panel found CS and CC to be credible and reliable witnesses.

35. First, CS’s evidence was consistent with the contemporaneous records of other veterinary professionals. Both the Alta Vista Animal Hospital records and the Ottawa Veterinary Hospital records accurately recorded that Butterscotch had jumped from a couch - not fallen from a bed - and that she was not described as being in severe pain. CS testified that she provided the same account to all the veterinary professionals who treated Butterscotch. The Panel accepted the College's submission that it is highly unlikely that CS would have reported something materially different to Dr. Fattah from what she consistently told every other veterinarian. The consistency of her account across multiple independent clinical settings was a strong indicator of reliability.

36. Second, Dr. Fattah's own records were demonstrably inaccurate in several respects, which undermined his account of events. His notes recorded that Butterscotch "fell off bed" when the uncontradicted evidence was that she jumped from a low-profile couch. His notes stated that Butterscotch "seemed to be in severe pain," which was inconsistent with CS’s evidence - corroborated by the records of other veterinary hospitals - that Butterscotch was stiff and moving slowly but was not in obvious pain or distress. His notes further recorded that he "advised" x-rays and bloodwork and that the owner "declined," when CS’s evidence - which the Panel accepted - was that Dr. Fattah mentioned these as options but shrugged and said "no, you don't have to" when she asked what she should do. That was not a recommendation, and it was not fair to characterize CS’s response as a "decline." The deficiencies in Dr. Fattah's records tended to support the evidence of CS and CC on the disputed points.

37. Third, CS and CC were non-parties with no interest in the outcome of this proceeding beyond a genuine concern for the welfare of their pet. They both acknowledged a positive relationship with Dr. Fattah prior to the incident with Butterscotch. As the College submitted, evidence from non-parties who have no interest in the matter is often regarded as particularly reliable. CS also demonstrated careful attention to detail: she testified that she had begun taking notes during the relevant period because she had grown suspicious, and she filed her complaint to the College shortly after the events in question. Her evidence was detailed, internally consistent, and given in a straightforward manner.

38. Fourth, Dr. Fattah's suggestion that CS and CC resisted his advice because they did not want to spend money on Butterscotch's care was entirely without merit. The evidence demonstrated that the family subsequently spent money on emergency and ongoing veterinary care for Butterscotch, including multi-day hospitalizations and specialist treatment. They were clearly committed pet owners who were prepared to pay for whatever measures were required. This aspect of Dr. Fattah's evidence was contrary to all the other evidence led in this case.

39. For all these reasons, where Dr. Fattah's evidence differed from that of SC and CC, the Panel preferred the evidence of CS and CC.

40. Dr. Mazzocco presented as a well-informed and objective expert. His evidence was balanced, as he found that Dr. Fattah met the standards of practice in certain areas while falling short in others. His analysis was supported by the literature references he cited. The Panel accepted Dr. Mazzocco's expert evidence.

41. As previously ruled by the Panel, Dr. Cochrane was not qualified to act as an expert witness in this proceeding. His evidence was not admitted as expert opinion evidence. While this does not mean the Panel was required to accept all of Dr. Mazzocco's expert evidence, Dr. Mazzocco's evidence was the only expert evidence before the Panel, and it supported all of the allegations contained in the Notice of Hearing.

Findings on the Allegations

42. The Panel found the allegation set out in paragraph 15 of the Notice of Hearing to have been proven on a balance of probabilities. On July 31, 2020, Dr. Fattah failed to develop an appropriate set of rule-outs or properly assess and/or recommend appropriate diagnostic testing or treatment for Butterscotch.

43. The Panel found the allegation at paragraph 16 of the Notice of Hearing to have been proven on a balance of probabilities. Given Butterscotch's history and presentation on July 31, 2020, Dr. Fattah ought to have treated Butterscotch aggressively for kidney failure. Dr. Fattah ought not to have only prescribed food and antibiotics in an anorexic patient with advanced renal failure.

44. With respect to the allegation at paragraph 17, the Panel found that the College had proven the sub-allegations at 17(a), (b), (d), and (f). Specifically, the Panel found that Dr. Fattah should have recommended further diagnostic testing, re-hydration, a plan to maintain caloric intake, and an urinalysis with urine culture, especially before starting the antibiotic Aventiclav. The Panel did not find sub-paragraphs (c) and (e) – restriction of protein and phosphorus and treatment to address acid/base and electrolyte abnormalities – to be proven.

45. The Panel found the allegations set out in paragraph 18 of the Notice of Hearing to have been proven on a balance of probabilities. Dr. Fattah failed to make proper records. His medical records for the July 17, 2020 visit were inaccurate and inadequate, the records lacked an assessment of the patient, they did not contain a record of communications with the owner regarding bloodwork results, the subjective and objective portions of the record were not separate from his assessment, and his note that he "advised" x-ray and bloodwork and that the owner declined was not accurate.

46. In summary and on the basis of the facts set out above, the Panel finds that that Dr. Fattah engaged in professional misconduct within the meaning of paragraphs 2 (failing to maintain the standards of practice of the profession) and 27 (failing to make or retain the records required by the regulation) of section 17(1) of O. Reg. 1093 under the Veterinarians Act. With respect to paragraph 44, the Panel found that Dr. Fattah's conduct constituted an act or omission relevant to the practice of veterinary medicine that, having regard to the circumstances, would be regarded by members as unprofessional. The Panel did not find the conduct to be disgraceful or dishonourable.

47. In finding that Dr. Fattah’s conduct was unprofessional, the Panel finds that Dr. Fattah did not display good judgement in his care of Butterscotch. On July 31, 2020, he failed to examine Butterscotch properly and did not clearly recommend appropriate diagnostic testing or treatment. Later, Dr. Fattah’s failure to recommend aggressive treatment for Butterscotch’s renal disease displayed a serious disregard for his professional obligations and a failure to live up to the standards expected of him. These failings are contrary to general traits of good judgement and responsibility that are required of those privileged to practice the profession.

48. The parties are invited to contact Ms. Cindy Rose to schedule a hearing to address penalty and costs.

I, Dr. Sarah Thompson sign this decision as chairperson of the Panel and on behalf of the Panel members listed below.

Date: March 24, 2026

Signed:

Dr. Sarah Thompson, Chair

Dr. Sean Marshall

Dr. Atul Pakhawala

Dr. Michael Zigler

Mr. Douglas Reynolds