The Connecticut Department of Public Health asked an administrative hearing officer on Jan. 8, 2026, to revoke the registered nursing license of Peggy Kayumba, citing affidavits and school records that the department says show she did not complete the required program hours and clinical training at Medlife Institute Naples.

"The department is asking for revocation," Department counsel Joelle Newton said in an opening statement, summarizing the agency's reliance on an affidavit from Cleofat Tannus and an affidavit from Sherry Sutton Johnson that, the department says, document program deficiencies.

The hearing officer entered several exhibits into the record, including the statement of charges (dated July 17, 2025), a summary suspension order (June 2025) and investigative materials. The hearing officer overruled defense objections to the Tannus and Sutton Johnson affidavits, noting that hearsay is admissible in administrative proceedings and that admitted documents will be given appropriate weight.

Defense counsel argued the case is not about patient safety and challenged the sufficiency of the department's evidence. "This case is not about patient safety," Attorney Miller said in an opening statement, and urged the panel to dismiss the charges and restore Kayumba's license. Miller told the panel the department's case rests on generalized affidavits that do not identify the respondent by name and that the absence of the affiants prevents cross-examination.

Kayumba testified after being sworn. She described prior coursework and said she attended Helene Fuld College of Nursing but did not complete the degree; she said she later attended Medlife Institute Naples to complete required coursework and practicum credits. On cross-examination about exhibits, she acknowledged some course entries were not present on a particular page but testified that the combined exhibits reflected the classes she took.

Counsel disputed the relevance of several respondent exhibits and some recently dated materials, and the hearing officer sustained objections to certain exhibits the panel found not relevant to the statement of charges. At other points the panel overruled objections and admitted records the hearing officer described as demonstrative or as actual academic accomplishments, while preserving sealed pages for separate review.

Late in the morning the department asked the panel to examine a sealed page of the Medlife transcript in executive session. The hearing officer ordered executive session for testimony about the sealed document and directed that the parties be moved to a separate room to review it.

No final disciplinary decision was announced at the hearing's close; the panel proceeded to executive session to review sealed evidence. The hearing record includes the statement of charges and the summary suspension order; further proceedings and the panel's eventual disposition of the petition remain pending.