Smith v. Board of Medical Quality Assurance

Good Law
1988 Cal. App. LEXIS 578·202 Cal. App. 3d 316·248 Cal. Rptr. 704
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 22, 1988A038881California4,620 words

Opinion

Opinion

Channell, J.

In this case of first impression, we are asked to determine the constitutionality of section 2292 of the Business and Professions Code, authorizing the Board of Medical Quality Assurance to compel a physician to undergo a professional competency examination. Respondent board, without first granting appellant John Phillip Smith, M.D., the right to appear at its hearing, ordered him to undergo this examination. On appeal, Smith contends, inter alia, that the board’s procedure denied him equal protection and due process. We reject these contentions and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

I. Facts

Appellant John Phillip Smith is a physician licensed to practice in this state. In May 1986, the executive director of the respondent Board of Medical Quality Assurance (the Board) prepared a petition requesting that Smith be compelled to take a professional competency examination. The petition alleged reasonable cause to believe that Smith was “unable to practice medicine with reasonable skill and safety to patients” and set forth, as a factual basis for this claim, five case histories of cardiac patients whom Smith was alleged to have improperly treated. Two cardiologists…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.