Faulkenstein v. District of Columbia Board of Medicine

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that there was ―no warrant to disturb the Board‘s findings‖ where, inter alia, the evidence depicted Faulkenstein as having ―a propensity for bad record-keeping‖ and the Board had grave doubts about his veracity
• concluding that there was “no warrant to disturb the Board’s findings” where, inter alia, the evidence depicted Faulkenstein as having “a propensity for bad record-keeping” and the Board had grave doubts about his veracity
• concluding that there was ―no warrant to disturb the Board‘s findings‖ where, inter alia, the evidence depicted Faulkenstein as having ―a propensity for bad record-keeping‖ and the Board had grave doubts about his veracity

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).