Preview:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 35647 IN THE MATTER OF THE BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGIST EXAMINERS' FINAL ORDER CASE NO. PSY-P4B-01-010-002 RE: DR. EILEEN WRIGHT. _______________________________________ DR. EILEEN WRIGHT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. THE BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINERS, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Boise, January 2010 Term 2010 Opinion No. 7 Filed: January 28, 2010 Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District of the State of Idaho, in and for Nez Perce County. The Hon. Jeff M. Brudie, District Judge. The decision of the district court is affirmed in part and reversed in part. Edwin L. Litteneker, Lewiston, for appellant. Naylor & Hales, P.C., Boise, for respondent. Bruce Castleton argued.

EISMANN, Chief Justice. This is an appeal from the judgment of the district court on a petition for judicial review of agency action. The district court held that the appellant could not challenge an earlier final order of the agency and it upheld the subsequent final order. We affirm the first holding and reverse the second.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Dr. Eileen Wright was licensed to practice psychology in Idaho on February 1, 1995, and she began working in private practice as a psychologist in 1998. On December 10, 1999, the judge presiding over a contentious domestic relations case appointed Wright to conduct a

parenting evaluation of the parties in that case. They had been divorced on February 5, 1999, with mother being awarded sole legal custody of their two minor children due to father being a habitual perpetrator of domestic violence. The father was awarded periods of visitation with the children, and he had instituted contempt proceedings against the mother, contending that she had wrongfully denied him visitation. On April 4, 2000, Wright submitted her parenting evaluation to the judge. Her report was critical of the mother and recommended that the parents have joint legal custody of their children and that the father have increased visitation. On June 23, 2000, the judge issued an order finding the mother in contempt and adopting Wrights custody recommendations. A few months later, Wright began a sexual relationship with the father. The mother reported Wright to the Idaho State Board of Psychologist Examiners (Board), and on May 15, 2003, it commenced disciplinary proceedings against Wright. The matter was tried before a hearing officer, who made recommended findings regarding Wrights "sexual intimacies" with the father. On April 22, 2005, the Board issued a final order ("2005 Order") adopting those findings and concluding that Wrights "actions constitute a violation of Idaho Code Sections 54-2909(d) and (e), and specifically Sections 4.07(a) and (b) of the 1992 Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct published by the American Psychology Association." As a result, the Board suspended Wrights license to practice psychology for five years and ordered Wright to pay, within ninety days, costs and attorney fees incurred in the sum of $17,558.61 and a fine in the amount of $1,000.00. The Board also ordered that Wrights license could be reinstated after three years if she had paid the costs, attorney fees, and fine and had complied with other listed conditions. On August 18, 2005, the Board issued an order to show cause alleging that Wright had failed to pay, within ninety days, the sums she had been ordered to pay. It alleged, "Respondents failure to comply with the terms of the Final Order constitutes grounds for additional discipline against Respondents license." On September 26, 2005, the Board issued an amended order to show cause that was identical to the first order to show cause except that it added the allegation, "In addition, according to the affidavit of Allen Funk filed herein, Respondent has practiced psychology without a valid license after the date of her license suspension on April 22, 2005." The amended order to show cause was heard by a hearing officer who made recommended findings that Wright had failed to pay the sums ordered and had continued to

2

practice psychology after her license was suspended. In a final order issued on April 19, 2006, ("2006 Order") the Board adopted the hearing officers findings and found "[t]hat Respondents actions in failing to pay those costs in the order and continuing to practice psychology constitutes [sic] a violation of the Final Order dated April 22, 2005." It determined that "[t]hese violations

constitute grounds for additional disciplinary action against her license to practice psychology in the state of Idaho pursuant to Idaho Code Sections 54-2305 and 54-2309, and IDAPA 24.12.01.375," and it suspended her license "for a period of five (5) years from the date of this order." On May 16, 2006, Wright filed a petition for judicial review in the district court. She sought to challenge both the 2005 Order and the 2006 Order. The district court held that Wright had not filed a timely petition for judicial review with respect to the 2005 Order and the court therefore had no jurisdiction to review that Order. The court affirmed the 2006 Order on the ground that the Board could impose the penalty as a violation of Idaho Code

Download wright-20v-20board.pdf

Idaho Law