Pages v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Medicine

542 So. 2d 456, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1087, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2338, 1989 WL 43357
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 2, 1989
Docket88-2141
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 542 So. 2d 456 (Pages v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Medicine) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Pages v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Medicine, 542 So. 2d 456, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1087, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2338, 1989 WL 43357 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Opinion

542 So.2d 456 (1989)

Beltran J. PAGES, M.D., Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, BOARD OF MEDICINE, Appellee.

No. 88-2141.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 2, 1989.

Dunn, Dresnick, Lodish & Miller and Mark A. Dresnick, Miami, and Helen L. Stone, Miami Beach, for appellant.

Lisa S. Nelson, Bill O'Neil, Jonathan King, Stephanie A. Daniel, and Kenneth E. Easley, Tallahassee, for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., BARKDULL, J., and JAMES C. DAUKSCH, Jr., Associate Judge.

JAMES C. DAUKSCH, Jr., Associate Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of appellee suspending appellant from the practice of medicine for three years and for probation for an indefinite period thereafter. The evidence amply supports the penalty recommended by the hearing officer, to six months suspension and a fine and two years probation. In order for the appellee to increase the penalty, as it did, it is necessary to comply with Section 120.57(1)(b)(10), Florida Statutes (1987). See Bernal v. Department of Professional Regulation, 517 So.2d 113 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), affirmed, 531 So.2d 967 (Fla. 1988). It is necessary for the Board of Medicine to conduct a "review of the complete record ..." and state "with particularity its reasons" for increasing the penalty "... in the order, by citing to the record in justifying the action." That was not done here and that failure requires reversal. We reverse the order increasing the penalty and remand the matter to the Board of Medicine for entry of a proper order. Upon remand the Board may want to reconsider, or be *457 prepared to justify, its "indefinite," potentially lifetime, probation requirement.

Penalty order reversed; remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Shah v. Department of Health
804 So. 2d 615 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS AND TRAINING COMM. v. Bradley
596 So. 2d 661 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1992)
Inlet Mortgage Co. v. State, Department of Banking & Finance, Division of Finance
582 So. 2d 764 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Sakhuja v. Department of Professional Regulation
568 So. 2d 486 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Hambley v. DEPT. OF PRO. REGULATION, DIV. OF REAL ESTATE
568 So. 2d 970 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
O'Connor v. Dept. of Pro. Regulation, Const. Industry Licensing Bd.
566 So. 2d 549 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Bajrangi v. DEPT. OF BUSINESS REG.
561 So. 2d 410 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Escobar v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Medicine
560 So. 2d 1355 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Hanley v. DEPT. OF PRO. REGULATION
549 So. 2d 1164 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Grimberg v. DEPT. OF PRO. REGULATION, BD. OF MEDICINE
542 So. 2d 457 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
542 So. 2d 456, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1087, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2338, 1989 WL 43357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pages-v-department-of-professional-regulation-board-of-medicine-fladistctapp-1989.