Ala. Code
Code of Alabama

Ala. Code § 34-24-367 (2026)

Judicial Review; Immediate Effect of Suspension or Revocation of License; Venue.

✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaAla. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Judicial review of the orders and decisions of the Medical Licensure Commission shall be governed by the provisions of Section 41-22-20 (the Alabama Administrative Procedure Act); provided however, that the following procedures shall take precedence over the provisions of Section 41-22-20(c) relating to the issuance of a stay of any order of the licensure commission suspending or revoking a license to practice medicine. The suspension or revocation of a license to practice medicine shall be given immediate effect, it being the expressly stated legislative purpose and intent that the imposition of the penalty of suspension or revocation of a license to practice medicine shall create a presumption that the continuation in practice of the physician constitutes an immediate danger to the public health, safety, and welfare. No stay or supersedeas shall be granted pending judicial review of a decision by the licensure commission to suspend or revoke a license to practice medicine unless a reviewing court, upon proof by the party seeking judicial review, finds in writing that the action of the licensure commission was taken without statutory authority, was arbitrary or capricious, or constituted a gross abuse of discretion. An order of the licensure commission temporarily suspending a license to practice medicine under the authority of Section 34-24-361(f) shall not be stayed pending judicial review permitted under Section 41-22-20 of any preliminary, procedural, or intermediate ruling or decision of the licensure commission unless the reviewing court, upon proof by the party seeking judicial review, finds in writing that the action of the licensure commission was taken without statutory authority, was arbitrary or capricious, constituted a gross abuse of discretion, or was made in violation of the requirements of Section 41-22-19(d). Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, any action commenced for the purpose of seeking judicial review of the administrative decisions of the Medical Licensure Commission, including writ of mandamus, or judicial review pursuant to the Alabama Administrative Procedure Act, Chapter 22 of Title 41, must be filed, commenced, and maintained in the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals.

(Acts 1981, No. 81-218, p. 273, §26; Acts 1982, No. 82-493, p. 817, §1; Acts 1983, 2nd Ex. Sess., No. 83-131, p. 137, §1; Acts 1988, No. 88-86, p. 110, §1; Act 2008-397, p. 771, §1.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1988–2014 · leading case: Ex Parte Med. Licensure Com'n of Alabama, 13 So. 3d 397 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ex Parte Med. Licensure Com'n of Alabama, 13 So. 3d 397 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008). · cites it 79× “See § 34-24-367, Ala.Code 1975. With respect to the revocation of a license, § 41-22-20(c) provides: "The filing of the notice of appeal .”
Eley v. Med. Licensure Com'n of Alabama, 904 So. 2d 269 (Ala. Civ. App. 2003). · cites it 3× “" Eley appealed the Commission's March 7, 2001, order revoking his medical license to the Circuit Court of Montgomery County ("the trial court") pursuant to § 34-24-367, Ala.Code 1975, and on March 19, 2002, the trial court entered a judgment affirming the Commission's order,…”
Waltz v. Herlihy, 682 F. Supp. 501 (S.D. Ala. 1988). · cites it 5× “Despite plaintiff’s mere allegations to the contrary, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not vest this plaintiff with a right to select from the outset a judicial forum over an administrative forum which is authorized by the state to establish and enforce…”
Morrison v. Gurley, 13 So. 3d 414 (Ala. 2009). · cites it 8× “I respectfully dissent because I believe that the statutory limitation in § 34-24-367, Ala.Code, 1975, [1] imposed on the authority of the circuit courts to issue a judicial stay of an order of the Medical Licensure Commission is unconstitutional in that it violates both certain…”
Cressman v. Alabama Bd. of Med. Examiners, 72 So. 3d 679 (Ala. Civ. App. 2011). · cites it 8× “2003), this court construed a similar provision in § 34-24-367, Ala.Code 1975, which at that time provided that the judicial review of an administrative decision of the Medical Licensure Commission ("the Commission") "must be filed, commenced, and maintained in the Circuit Court…”
Med. Licensure Comm'n of Ala. v. Almeida, 897 So. 2d 1091 (Ala. Civ. App. 2003). “Section 41-22-20(j) provides *1092 for a trial de novo under certain circumstances — i.”
King v. Med. Licensure Comm'n of the State, 166 So. 3d 676 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014). “" § 34-24-367, Ala.Code 1975. King filed a notice of appeal with the Commission on April 4, 2014, within 30 days after entry of the notice of its final order on March 6, 2014.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.