Grannis

Grannis v. Board of Medical Examiners

Bad Law
19 Cal. App. 3d 551·1971 Cal. App. LEXIS 1302·96 Cal. Rptr. 863
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 24, 1971Civ. 28867California6,014 words

Opinion

Opinion

Taylor, J.

This is an appeal from the judgment in a mandamus proceeding affirming an order of respondent, Board of Medical Examiners (hereinafter Board) revoking the certificate of petitioner, Dr. Grannis, to practice medicine, and from an order quashing his subpoena duces tecum.

On the appeal from the judgment, Dr. Grannis contends that: 1) a judgment entered on a plea of nolo contendere is not a conviction within Business and Professions Code section 2390; 2) the portion of Business and Professions Code section 2390 prohibiting the dangerous use of alcoholic beverages is not a valid and constitutional exercise of the police power; 3) he was not guilty of unprofessional conduct and, therefore, not subject to the disciplinary action of the Board; and 4) the Board abused its discretion and exceeded its jurisdiction as to the penalty imposed. On the appeal from the order granting the motion to quash the subpoena duces tecum, Dr. Grannis argues that the court abused its discretion in granting the motion.

The record reveals the following: In 1968, the Board, pursuant to Business and Professions Code section 2361, accused Dr. Grannis of two counts of “unprofessional conduct” based on…

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.