Legal Opinion · Dissent

Sobel v. Board of Pharmacy

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 28, 1994No. 111-90; CA A68878Published

1DissentRossman, P. J.

Because the majority decides that the facts of this case are distinguishable from other cases in which we have held that the clear and convincing standard of proof is applicable to proof of fraud in an administrative proceeding, it concludes that it need not discuss the authority most relevant to the question of whether that higher standard of proof might not also be applicable under these facts. I would answer, rather than avoid, the question that the parties have put to us. I would hold that the clear and convincing standard of proof is applicable and would reverse the Board and remand the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Riley Hill General Contractor, Inc. v. Tandy Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Bay v. State Board of EducationOregon Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Cook v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
  4. Mutual of Enumclaw Insurance v. McBrideOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Bernard v. Board of Dental ExaminersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1970

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API