Scheininger v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Medical Examiners

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Scheininger v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Medical Examiners

443 So. 2d 387, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 25343

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 30, 1983

DocketNo. AU-38

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 443 So. 2d 387 (Scheininger v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Medical Examiners) 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

Scheininger v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Medical Examiners, 443 So. 2d 387, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 25343 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find competent substantial evidence in the record to support the Agency’s order suspending Dr. Scheininger’s license based on charges of violating Sections 458.-331(1)(t) and 458.331(1)(q), Florida Statutes, relating to the failure to practice medicine with that level of care, skill and treatment recognized by a reasonably prudent similar physician as being acceptable under similar circumstances, and the inappropriate prescribing of scheduled controlled substances, respectively.

The record supports the hearing officer’s finding that on two occasions Dr. Schein-inger dispensed phentermine and phendime-trazine, both scheduled controlled substances, to patients under his continuing care for obesity control without first giving them physical examinations as required by the minimum acceptable prevailing commu[388]*388nity medical standard. The hearing officer’s findings support the Board’s conclusion that Dr. Scheininger routinely dispensed said drugs to weight control patients on a continuing basis without appropriate follow-up care contrary to the best interests of the patients. We find no error in the findings and conclusions in the Agency’s final order. AFFIRMED.

BOOTH, LARRY G.- SMITH and SHIVERS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We find competent substantial evidence in the record to support the Agency’s order suspending Dr. Scheininger’s license based on charges of violating Sections 458.-331(1)(t) and 458.331(1)(q), Florida Statutes, relating to the failure to practice medicine with that level of care, skill and treatment recognized by a reasonably prudent similar physician as being acceptable under similar circumstances, and the inappropriate prescribing of scheduled controlled substances, respectively.

The record supports the hearing officer’s finding that on two occasions Dr. Schein-inger dispensed phentermine and phendime-trazine, both scheduled controlled substances, to patients under his continuing care for obesity control without first giving them physical examinations as required by the minimum acceptable prevailing commu[388]*388nity medical standard. The hearing officer’s findings support the Board’s conclusion that Dr. Scheininger routinely dispensed said drugs to weight control patients on a continuing basis without appropriate follow-up care contrary to the best interests of the patients. We find no error in the findings and conclusions in the Agency’s final order. AFFIRMED.

BOOTH, LARRY G.- SMITH and SHIVERS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

443 So. 2d 387, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 25343, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scheininger-v-department-of-professional-regulation-board-of-medical-fladistctapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack