Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Licensure Reinstatement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board holds reinstatement hearing for Nosrat Gadducci; judge and attorneys present evidence and testimony
Summary
A petition to reinstate the chiropractic license of Nosrat Gadducci drew testimony about prior convictions, rehabilitation activities and continuing education. The Administrative Law Judge and the state attorney outlined the disciplinary history; Gadducci described therapy, volunteer work and sobriety.
The Board of Chiropractic Examiners heard a petition on Oct. 9 from Nosrat Gadducci seeking reinstatement of a license he surrendered in 2015.
An Administrative Law Judge, Dina Galli, presided and the state was represented by Deputy Attorney General Trent Fucchi. Bruce Shaffee appeared for Gadducci. Fucchi summarized the board record, noting Gadducci’s original license date (Jan. 27, 1992), a 2009 misdemeanor conviction that led to probation, a 2014 felony complaint alleging inappropriate touching and the stipulated surrender of the license in June 2015. Fucchi told the board that Gadducci’s prior petition, heard in 2021, had been denied for insufficient evidence of rehabilitation.
Gadducci testified under oath and said he is 70 years old, has been sober since 2008 and has participated in individual and group therapy as well as 12‑step meetings and spiritual services. He described volunteer work with nonprofit groups that help people experiencing homelessness and continued attendance at synagogue and spiritual classes. He said he has worked in administrative roles at a medical facility and as a volunteer at his former chiropractic office, and that he helps care for family members including a grandchild. Gadducci said he does not currently provide chiropractic adjustments and that he seeks reinstatement because he lacks other professional skills and financial resources.
Fucchi and board counsel asked about the 2015 felony-related allegation and prior treatment programs. Gadducci said he completed a residential treatment program in 2008 and a 52‑week offender program in 2015, and he described lessons he said he learned about boundaries and never being alone with a patient. He also said an organization he sought to volunteer with had declined him because of his conviction.
Board members questioned Gadducci about his current work hours, the nature of his volunteer and paid assignments (he said he works about 10 hours a week in an administrative role), whether he had any patient contact (he said he did not), and whether he had been practicing clinically since the surrender (he said he had not). Members also asked whether he had fully described the incidents underlying his surrender in written materials; Gadducci acknowledged the record and reiterated his remorse.
No board decision was made at the hearing. The matter concluded when the judge closed the petitioner’s testimony and the hearing portion was adjourned; the board will consider the written record and the hearing record as it decides the petition.
