Ongom v. Department of Health
Washington Supreme Court
1Dissent
¶40 (dissenting) — The majority holds that the constitutionally required standard of proof in all medical disciplinary hearings is clear and convincing evidence. Majority at 134. The majority relies on Bang D. Nguyen v. Department of Health, 144 Wn.2d 516, 29 P.3d 689 (2001), to invalidate WAC 246-10-606, the regulation establishing the preponderance of evidence standard of proof for professional disciplinary hearings under the Uniform Disciplinary Act, chapter 18.130 RCW. I dissent because Nguyen was wrongly decided. I would overrule Nguyen and hold that the constitutionally required…
2Cases cited60 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Goldberg v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Addington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- State v. GunwallWashington Supreme Court · 1986
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.