Haran v. Board of Registration in Medicine

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that offensive use of collateral estoppel is a generally accepted practice, and that “[flairness is the decisive consideration” (quotation omitted)
• emphasizing that precluded party was represented by counsel at four-day administrative hearing
• finding no error in revocation of doctor’s Massachusetts license on basis of revocation proceedings in New York State concerning his New York State license
• physician whose license was revoked by foreign jurisdiction had no right to “disprove” finding of negligence and professional incompetence before board
• no violation of G. L. c. 30A, § 14 [7], where hearing officer’s summary decision relied on finding of foreign jurisdiction’s disciplinary proceeding
• board of registration should have “wide latitude” in deciding which issues suited for resolution by collateral estoppel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).