Jongepier v. Lopez

California Court of Appeal Apr 28, 1983 No. Civ. 66655Published

Before: Potter

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the Health and Safety Code prohibits the Department of Health Services from disclosing a complainant's name to a facility operator, even when the complainant accompanies an inspector, and that such disclosure cannot be a condition for exercising the right to accompany an inspector.

Issues

Whether the Health and Safety Code permits the disclosure of a complainant's name to a facility operator when the complainant accompanies an inspector.
Whether a complainant waives their right to anonymity by requesting to accompany an inspector during a facility inspection.

Disposition. reversed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Section 1419 clearly evinces an intent to preserve the anonymity of the complainant”

“The facility is, of course, entitled to such identification of persons accompanying the inspector as will establish their right to be present. But this requires only that the inspector certify that they are the complainant.”

“The complainant’s implied consent to an introduction justifying his or her presence does not, therefore, constitute a waiver of anonymity.”

Opinion

POTTER, Acting P. J.

Plaintiff Sarah S. Jongepier appeals from the order of the superior court denying a peremptory writ of mandate to require defendants Ralph Lopez, Chief, Health Facilities Division, Los Angeles County Department of Health Services and Beverlee Myers, Director, California State Department of Health Services, to refrain from introducing complainants by name to operators of long-term health facilities during inspections pursuant to Health and Safety Code

section 1420 in which such complainants accompany the inspector as therein provided.

The State Department of Health Services is the agency charged with the responsibility for insuring that long-term health facilities are in compliance with state statutes and regulations pertaining to health care, by conducting inspections when a request is made therefor, pursuant to section 1419. It discharges that function in the County of Los Angeles through its agent, the county health facilities division.

The facts are not in dispute. In carrying out the inspection function, representatives of the State Department of Health Services are governed by a proce

[537]

dure manual which plaintiff contends violates the provisions of the Long-Term Care, Health, Safety, and Security Act of 1973 (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 1417-1439) and particularly the provisions of sections 1419 and 1420, the text of which is as follows:

“Any person may request an inspection of any long-term health care facility in accordance with the provisions of this chapter by giving notice to the state department of an alleged violation of applicable requirements of state law. Any such notice shall be in writing signed by the complainant and shall set forth with reasonable particularity the matters complained of. The substance of the complaint shall be provided to the licensee no earlier than at the commencement of the inspection.

Neither the substance of the complaint provided the licensee nor any copy of the complaint or record published, released, or otherwise made available to the licensee shall disclose the name of any individual complainant or other person mentioned in the complaint, except the name or names of any duly authorized officer, employee, or agent of the state department conducting the investigation or inspection

Jongepier v. Lopez

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief