Opinion ID: 2022006
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Matter of Orens:

Text: Perry Orens, M.D., was charged with 34 specifications of professional misconduct arising from his care and treatment of 10 patients. At a prehearing conference, Orens objected to the composition of the three-member panel. He argued that the panel did not include a lay member as required by Public Health Law § 230 (6). The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) overruled the objection. Following the hearing, the professional conduct committee concluded that the Department of Health sustained its burden of proof and revoked Orens' license to practice medicine. Following an administrative review of the committee's findings, Orens then commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding in the Appellate Division seeking to annul the determination ( see Public Health Law § 230-c [5]). The Court unanimously annulled the determination, granted the petition and remitted the matter to the Board for a new hearing ( see Matter of Orens v Novello, 284 AD2d 26 [2001]). The Court rejected the State's claim that lay member includes anyone who is not a licensed physician ( id. at 28). It concluded that the Legislature intended to exclude from that definition any person subject to the disciplinary measures of section 230, including physician's assistants ( see id. at 29-30).