Morris 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.

• vacating Board decision because proceedings “denied [the physician] fairness in a due process sense.”
• reviewing board should not disregard trier of fact's findings on credibility
• agency could not discount magistrate’s negative credibility findings by merely professing expertise in dynamics of psychiatrist-patient relationship
• “board exceeded its proper role in announcing, with no expert evidence in the record to support it, that its special expertise permits it to identify ‘red flags indicative of sexual abuse’ ”
• \We have never held . . . that the administrative agency responsible for making the final decision may not revise or reject the findings of a hearing officer on conflicting evidence\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).