Legal Opinion · Dissent

Russell v. Department of Business & Professional Regulation

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 14, 1994No. 92-4071Published

1DissentSmith, Senior Judge

The majority correctly states that the Board determined it was without jurisdiction to revisit appellant’s case pursuant to appellant’s motion to set aside, or to rehear his case based on newly-discovered evidence. Although the Board allowed appellant’s counsel to proffer for the record the testimony of two expert witnesses, Drs. Eugene Patterson and Stanley Malamed, the Board gave no consideration to the proffered evidence in weighing the decision whether to re-open appellant’s case. It appears that the Board considered only the arguments of counsel, and, as noted by the majority, found them…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Mann v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of DentistryDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API