Nev. Rev. Stat. § 630.311

Review and investigation of complaint by committee designated by Board; formal charging document; proceedings confidential; publication of summary of proceedings and determinations

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 630.311  Review and investigation of complaint by committee designated by Board; formal charging document; proceedings confidential; publication of summary of proceedings and determinations.

      1.  Except as otherwise provided in NRS 630.323, a committee designated by the Board and consisting of members of the Board shall review each complaint received by the Board that is within the jurisdiction of the Board and conduct an investigation to determine if there is a reasonable basis for the complaint. The committee must be composed of at least three members of the Board, at least one of whom is not a physician. The committee may issue orders to aid its investigation including, but not limited to, compelling a physician to appear before the committee.

      2.  If, after conducting an investigation, the committee determines that there is a reasonable basis for the complaint and that a violation of any provision of this chapter has occurred, the committee may file a formal charging document with the Board.

      3.  The proceedings of the committee are confidential and are not subject to the requirements of NRS 241.020. Within 20 days after the conclusion of each meeting of the committee, the Board shall publish a summary setting forth the proceedings and determinations of the committee. The summary must not identify any person involved in the complaint that is the subject of the proceedings.

      (Added to NRS by 1977, 824; A 1983, 306; 1985, 2239; 1987, 200; 1993, 2302; 2009, 2966; 2017, 4412; 2025, 1623)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 2012–2018 · leading case: Buckwalter v. Nevada Board of Medical Examiners
Buckwalter v. Nevada Board of Medical Examiners (2012) ca9 “See Nev.Rev.Stat. § 630.311. If the investigation substantiates the complaint, the Board may bring formal charges against the physician and set a hearing date.”
SARFO VS. STATE, BD. OF MED EXAM'RS (2018) nev · cites it 10× “See NRS 630.311. Upon receipt of the initial complaint filed by a member of the public against a physician, the Board must designate an IC to "review each complaint and conduct an investigation to determine if there is a reasonable basis for the complaint.”
SARFO VS. STATE, BD. OF MED EXAM'RS (2018) nev · cites it 10× “See NRS 630.311. Upon receipt of the initial complaint filed by a member of the public against a physician, the Board must designate an IC to "review each complaint and conduct an investigation to determine if there is a reasonable basis for the complaint.”
Sarfo v. State (2018) nev · cites it 5× “See NRS 630.311. Upon receipt of the initial complaint *653 filed by a member of the public against a physician, the Board must designate an IC to "review each complaint and conduct an investigation to determine if there is a reasonable basis for the complaint.”
Sarfo v. State, Bd. of Med Exam'rs (2018) nev · cites it 4× “See NRS 630.311. Upon receipt of the initial complaint filed by a member of the public against a physician, the Board must designate an IC to "review each complaint and conduct an investigation to determine if there is a reasonable basis for the complaint.”
Kevin Buckwalter v. State of Nevada Board (2012) ca9 “See Nev. Rev. Stat. § 630.311 . If the investigation substantiates the complaint, the Board may bring formal charges against the physician and set a hearing date.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 630.311(1) — 4 cases
SARFO VS. STATE, BD. OF MED EXAM'RS (2018) nev “See NRS 630.311. Upon receipt of the initial complaint filed by a member of the public against a physician, the Board must designate an IC to "review each complaint and conduct an investigation to determine if there is a reasonable basis for the complaint.”
SARFO VS. STATE, BD. OF MED EXAM'RS (2018) nev “See NRS 630.311. Upon receipt of the initial complaint filed by a member of the public against a physician, the Board must designate an IC to "review each complaint and conduct an investigation to determine if there is a reasonable basis for the complaint.”
Sarfo v. State (2018) nev “See NRS 630.311. Upon receipt of the initial complaint *653 filed by a member of the public against a physician, the Board must designate an IC to "review each complaint and conduct an investigation to determine if there is a reasonable basis for the complaint.”
Sarfo v. State, Bd. of Med Exam'rs (2018) nev “See NRS 630.311. Upon receipt of the initial complaint filed by a member of the public against a physician, the Board must designate an IC to "review each complaint and conduct an investigation to determine if there is a reasonable basis for the complaint.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 630.311(2) — 4 cases
SARFO VS. STATE, BD. OF MED EXAM'RS (2018) nev “See NRS 630.311. Upon receipt of the initial complaint filed by a member of the public against a physician, the Board must designate an IC to "review each complaint and conduct an investigation to determine if there is a reasonable basis for the complaint.”
SARFO VS. STATE, BD. OF MED EXAM'RS (2018) nev “See NRS 630.311. Upon receipt of the initial complaint filed by a member of the public against a physician, the Board must designate an IC to "review each complaint and conduct an investigation to determine if there is a reasonable basis for the complaint.”
Sarfo v. State, Bd. of Med Exam'rs (2018) nev “See NRS 630.311. Upon receipt of the initial complaint filed by a member of the public against a physician, the Board must designate an IC to "review each complaint and conduct an investigation to determine if there is a reasonable basis for the complaint.”
Sarfo v. State (2018) nev “See NRS 630.311. Upon receipt of the initial complaint *653 filed by a member of the public against a physician, the Board must designate an IC to "review each complaint and conduct an investigation to determine if there is a reasonable basis for the complaint.”
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.