Jean-Claude Killey

The appellant, a nurse practitioner, appealed a finding of professional misconduct by the Discipline Committee of the College of Nurses of Ontario.

The Committee found she had improperly issued 396 COVID-19 vaccine medical exemption letters to clients who merely watched an informational slide presentation.

The appellant argued she was acting as an educator providing informed consent and relying on public health directives.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the Committee's conclusion that the letters were medical exemptions and that the appellant breached multiple standards of practice.

The court also dismissed allegations of procedural fairness and bias.

The moving party sought leave to appeal an order transferring a matter from the Family Law Team to the Civil Law Team in Toronto.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion, finding that while there was good reason to doubt the motion judge's finding on jurisdiction, the decision to have the matter addressed by the Civil Law Team was an exercise of administrative discretion that did not raise a matter of such importance to warrant leave to appeal.

The Member was alleged to have committed professional misconduct based on a disciplinary finding in Michigan, where she permanently surrendered her nursing license following allegations of inappropriate sexual interactions with inmates.

The Member admitted to the allegations and agreed to a Joint Statement of Facts.

The Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct and, accepting a joint submission on penalty, ordered an oral reprimand and the immediate revocation of her certificate of registration.

This decision concerns an application by Dr. Kelly Diane Riedel regarding the validity and administration of the Dmyant Sangha Family Trust and the Sangha Property Trust.

Dr. Riedel alleges that the trusts are shams, created to defeat her family law entitlements, and seeks various forms of relief including the production of legal records and the conversion of the application to an action.

The court addresses the legal standards for sham trusts, the relevance of disputed facts, and the entitlement to privileged documents.

The application to convert to an action is dismissed, and the court sets out a process for determining threshold questions regarding the validity of the trusts.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought disciplinary proceedings against a Registered Practical Nurse for physically, verbally, and emotionally abusing a vulnerable patient and for administering the incorrect flu vaccination to four patients.

The Member did not attend the hearing.

The Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct by grabbing and aggressively speaking to a patient, and by failing to meet medication standards.

The Committee ordered an oral reprimand, a five-month suspension, and terms and conditions on the Member's certificate of registration.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought disciplinary proceedings against the Member for professional misconduct.

The Member admitted to providing inaccurate and misleading information about COVID-19 and vaccines to patients, administering an unauthorized intravenous infusion without a physician's order, failing to wear appropriate personal protective equipment with a COVID-19 positive patient, and submitting a falsified COVID-19 vaccination certificate to her employer.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and found the Member committed professional misconduct.

The Committee accepted a Joint Submission on Order, imposing an oral reprimand, a six-month suspension, and terms, conditions, and limitations on her certificate of registration.

The College of Nurses of Ontario and the member presented a joint submission on penalty following findings of professional misconduct, including practicing out of scope and unprofessional conduct toward colleagues.

The Discipline Committee accepted the joint submission, ordering a four-month suspension, an oral reprimand, meetings with a regulatory expert, and 18 months of employer notification.

The panel found the penalty met the goals of general and specific deterrence, remediation, and public protection, and did not bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought disciplinary proceedings against a Registered Practical Nurse who failed to administer medications to 26-29 patients, disposed of the medications, and falsified patient records to conceal his actions.

The Member was subsequently convicted of criminal mischief and failed to report the charges and convictions to the College.

Proceeding by way of an Agreed Statement of Facts and Joint Submission on Order, the Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct.

The Committee accepted the joint submission, ordering an 8-month suspension, an oral reprimand, and various terms and conditions including employer notification and practice audits.

The Member, a Registered Practical Nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for failing to maintain professional boundaries with four patients.

The Member admitted to the allegations, which included exchanging personal and sexually suggestive texts, providing personal transportation for money, allowing a patient to reside in her home, and fostering a patient's dog.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and found the Member committed professional misconduct.

A joint submission on penalty was accepted, resulting in a reprimand, a four-month suspension, and terms, conditions, and limitations on her certificate of registration.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought allegations of professional misconduct against the respondent, a registered nurse, for failing to appropriately document the administration and wasting of narcotics.

The respondent admitted to the allegations.

The Discipline Committee found the respondent committed professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission on penalty.

The penalty included a reprimand, a three-month suspension, and terms, conditions, and limitations on the respondent's certificate of registration, including meetings with a regulatory expert and employer notification requirements.

The College of Nurses of Ontario alleged that the Member, a Nurse Practitioner, committed professional misconduct by issuing COVID-19 vaccine medical exemption letters without appropriate assessments or clinical indications, and by charging excessive fees.

The Discipline Committee found that the Member breached multiple standards of practice, including documentation and therapeutic nurse-client relationship standards, by issuing nearly 400 exemption letters based on group Zoom sessions without individual assessments.

The Committee concluded this conduct was disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional.

The allegation of charging an excessive fee was dismissed due to insufficient evidence.

The member, a registered practical nurse at a detox clinic, admitted to professional misconduct for sexually abusing and engaging in romantic relationships with two vulnerable patients.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and found that the member's conduct was disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional.

Accepting a Joint Submission on Order, the Committee ordered a 10-month suspension of the member's certificate of registration, an oral reprimand, remedial education, and reimbursement to the College for patient therapy funding.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought discipline proceedings against a Registered Nurse for alleged sexual harassment of three colleagues, failing to notify a physician of a patient's low urine output, and administering intravenous fluids without an order.

The Member admitted to the clinical allegations, which the Panel found constituted professional misconduct that was dishonourable and unprofessional.

Regarding the contested harassment allegations, the Panel found the Member engaged in unprofessional conduct towards two colleagues by participating in inappropriate sexual banter and touching, but this conduct did not meet the definition of sexual harassment.

The allegations regarding the third colleague were dismissed due to inconsistent and unreliable evidence.

The matter was adjourned for a penalty hearing.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought allegations of professional misconduct against the Member for engaging in a pattern of unwanted, inappropriately personal, and sexual behaviour towards a colleague.

The Member admitted to the allegations, which included attempting to kiss the colleague, touching her breast, biting her, and sending inappropriate text messages.

The Discipline Committee accepted an Agreed Statement of Facts and found the Member committed professional misconduct.

The Committee accepted a Joint Submission on Order, imposing a reprimand, a 6-month suspension, and terms including completion of a communication seminar, meetings with a regulatory expert, and 18 months of employer notification.

The appellant, a registered nurse practitioner, appealed a 10-month suspension imposed by the Discipline Committee for failing to maintain professional boundaries by engaging in an intimate relationship with a former patient while continuing to treat the former patient's spouse.

The appellant argued the penalty was unfit and failed to adequately account for the abusive nature of the relationship and her vulnerability.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the Panel made no error in principle, properly considered the mitigating psychological evidence, and imposed a fit penalty within the reasonable range given the serious impact on both patients.

The member, a Registered Practical Nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for verbally and physically abusing colleagues, threatening to withhold medication from a patient with dementia, and refusing to wear a mask during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The member admitted to the allegations through an Agreed Statement of Facts.

The Discipline Committee found the member committed professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a 10-month suspension, an oral reprimand, and various remedial conditions.

The College of Nurses of Ontario alleged that the Member, a Registered Nurse, committed professional misconduct by sexually abusing a patient during a home care visit.

The allegations centered on a single incident where the Member allegedly inserted his fingers into the patient's vagina without clinical purpose while providing wound care.

The Discipline Committee assessed the credibility of the witnesses, noting significant inconsistencies in the testimonies of the patient and her husband.

Finding the Member's denial credible and consistent with other evidence, the Committee concluded the College failed to prove the allegations on a balance of probabilities and dismissed the case.

The Member, a registered nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for exposing his penis and masturbating in front of a colleague at work.

The matter proceeded by way of an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Order.

The Discipline Committee found that the Member committed professional misconduct, as his actions contravened the standards of practice and constituted disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct.

The Committee accepted the joint submission on penalty, ordering an oral reprimand, a three-month suspension of the Member's certificate of registration, and the imposition of terms, conditions, and limitations, including meetings with a regulatory expert and employer notification.

The appellants appealed a motion judge's decision dismissing their summary judgment motion and granting summary judgment and a permanent stay to the respondents.

The core issue was the appellants' failure to immediately disclose settlement agreements with other defendants, which altered the litigation's adversarial landscape.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the motion judge's finding that these contingent settlement agreements, which included provisions for private evidence gathering and financial incentives for cooperation, changed the adversarial relationship into a cooperative one, triggering the immediate disclosure rule from Handley Estate.

The court reiterated that immediate disclosure is mandatory, regardless of contingencies or confidentiality clauses, and that a stay of proceedings is the appropriate remedy for such an abuse of process.

The appeal was dismissed.

The applicant, a Nurse Manager, sought judicial review of a decision by the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (HPARB) upholding an order by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) of the College of Nurses.

The ICRC ordered the applicant to complete a remediation program after a resident signed a 'Do Not Resuscitate' (DNR) form without a proper capacity assessment, despite the applicant having found the resident lacked capacity days earlier.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding the decisions reasonable as the core issue was the failure to properly assess capacity, not whether the resident actually had capacity at the time.