(Download) "State v. Bd. of Med. Exam." by Supreme Court of Montana # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: State v. Bd. of Med. Exam.
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 08, 1959
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 60 KB
Description
PROHIBITION ? PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS ? MALPRACTICE. 1. Prohibition ? Meaning of "jurisdiction." The term "jurisdiction," as used in statute providing that the writ of prohibition arrests the proceedings of any tribunal or board when such proceedings are without or in excess of the jurisdiction thereof, is the power to hear and determine the particular case. 2. Physicians and Surgeons ? Malpractice ? Revocation of certificate. Charges of unprofessional and unethical conduct made by Board of Medical Examiners against a physician relating to overcharges for services not performed, an attempted abortion, unauthorized removal - Page 382 of X-rays, and encouragement of fraudulent claims before Industrial Accident Board for injuries not actually suffered, were not outside scope of jurisdiction committed to the state board by statute authorizing the board to revoke the certificate of a physician and surgeon for unprofessional, dishonorable or immoral conduct. 3. Physicians and Surgeons ? State Board not divested of jurisdiction. Even though complaint filed with State Board of Medical Examiners charging a medical doctor with unprofessional and unethical conduct might have been insufficient, such insufficiency was not a defect which divested the state board of jurisdiction to entertain the proceeding where it had jurisdiction of the subject matter of the charges, and therefore prohibition did not lie to prevent the board from continuing with the proceedings. 4. Physicians and Surgeons ? Extent of Boards jurisdiction. Where charges made against a medical doctor in a complaint filed with the State Board of Medical Examiners were within class of matters which the board was authorized to hear and determine, jurisdiction of the board also included the power to determine, in the first instance, formal sufficiency of the charges, and doctors objection to such sufficiency should have been made directly to the board rather than by prohibition proceeding. 5. Physicians and Surgeons ? Board had exclusive jurisdiction. The State Board of Medical Examiners had exclusive jurisdiction of the granting and revoking of certificates admitting physicians and surgeons to practice, and in view of fact statutes do not provide for disqualification of board members, proceedings before the board may not be restrained merely by reason of fact that board itself initiated the proceedings against a physician and was therefore an interested party.