Connecticut Department of Public Health board revokes license of nurse Lisa Paulson

The Department of Public Health board voted unanimously on Jan. 15, 2025, to find several allegations proven against Lisa (Liza) Paulson, RN, and to revoke her Connecticut registered nursing license effective immediately.

The board’s fact-finding motion, moved by Sal Dixon and seconded by Mary (surname not specified), found the department had proven charges 1, 2, 3(a) and 3(b) and counts 4 and 5 in Petition No. 2019-1389; the board explicitly did not find charge 3(c) proven. The motion passed on a 4-0 roll-call vote (Dixon – aye; Mary – aye; Elizabeth Rodriguez – aye; Gina Reiner, chair – aye). The board then voted 4-0 to revoke Paulson’s license with immediate enforcement and without imposing a civil monetary penalty.

Why it matters: The board concluded the record—including testimony and department exhibits cited by board counsel—supported findings that between about February 2016 and February 2019 Paulson, while employed as a nurse at the Kennedy Center in Trumbull, allegedly provided controlled substances (OxyContin, Percocet, Adderall) to a coworker and diverted controlled substances from her workplace. The board found other alleged misconduct described in the statement of charges warranted discipline under state law and determined revocation was an appropriate remedy.

How the board reached its decision: During fact finding, board members said they relied on department exhibits and witness testimony. Chair Gina Reiner instructed members to cite exhibits or testimony that supported each paragraph of the statement of charges while making their findings. Board member Sal Dixon stated he found coworker testimony and department exhibits credible for counts 3(a) and 3(b) and for counts 1, 2, 4 and 5, but not for 3(c). Mary likewise said she found the witnesses credible but that there was no testing or other evidence sufficient to support 3(c). The board identified Connecticut statutory provisions cited in the statement of charges and considered available remedies under state law.

The board’s action and next steps: After the finding motion passed, the board proceeded to remedy. Dixon proposed revocation and asked that no civil fine be imposed; Mary seconded. The roll call on revocation was unanimous. Chair Reiner confirmed the revocation has immediate enforcement. Board counsel told the participants that a proposed memorandum of decision will be drafted and later placed on the board’s agenda for finalization by the full board when it meets with a quorum.

Respondent comment and counsel questions: At the hearing’s close, respondent Lisa Paulson, who had attended from out of state, said, “No. I understand what happened. I’m sorry that I wasn’t believed, but I understand.” Defense counsel asked for clarification about whether the revocation was suspended and whether a civil penalty had been imposed; the chair confirmed the revocation is immediate and that the board did not impose a civil monetary penalty.

Legal authorities cited in the hearing included Connecticut General Statutes §19a-10 and §19a-14 (charges alleged in the statement of charges), statutory grounds cited in the statement of charges under §20-99(b) (subsections the record cites as (b)(2) and (b)(6)), and the board referenced §19a-17 when discussing available remedies.

The hearing record will include the board’s findings and the forthcoming proposed memorandum of decision, which the board said will return to a future public agenda for formal adoption.