Court Opinion

ID: 9547086
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 17:41:32.437722+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:17:18.570083
License: Public Domain

Reed, C.J.
(concurring in the result) — I concur in the result. I have serious reservations, however, concerning our authority to disturb a sanction imposed by the Board— short of license revocation — after a finding of incompetency.
First, this issue was not thoroughly briefed. Second, I read the following language from In re Flynn, 52 Wn.2d 589, 596, 328 P.2d 150 (1958) as recognizing a further limit upon judicial review:
We have no authority to substitute our judgment for that of the director of licenses in respect to the disciplining of members of the dental profession for unprofessional conduct. Our jurisdiction is limited to determining whether the action taken by the director followed the statute and met due process constitutional standards. . . .
And, as stated in In re Kindschi, 52 Wn.2d 8, 14, 319 P.2d 824 (1958):
The legislature has vested authority and complete responsibility in the medical disciplinary board in such matters.
I view the "additional penalty" discussion, however, as being consistent with my reservations, because it involves *484both an action in excess of statutory authority and due process implications.
Reconsideration denied March 8, 1988.
Review denied by Supreme Court July 5, 1988.