Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190 (2026)

Grounds for suspending, revoking or refusing to grant license, registration or certification; alternative medicine not unprofessional conduct

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

677.190 Grounds for suspending, revoking or refusing to grant license, registration or certification; alternative medicine not unprofessional conduct. The Oregon Medical Board may refuse to grant, or may suspend or revoke, a license to practice for any of the following reasons:

(1)(a) Unprofessional or dishonorable conduct.

(b) For purposes of this subsection, the use of an alternative medical treatment shall not by itself constitute unprofessional conduct. For purposes of this paragraph:

(A) “Alternative medical treatment” means:

(i) A treatment that the treating physician, based on the physician’s professional experience, has an objective basis to believe has a reasonable probability for effectiveness in its intended use even if the treatment is outside recognized scientific guidelines, is unproven, is no longer used as a generally recognized or standard treatment or lacks the approval of the United States Food and Drug Administration;

(ii) A treatment that is supported for specific usages or outcomes by at least one other physician licensed by the Oregon Medical Board; and

(iii) A treatment that poses no greater risk to a patient than the generally recognized or standard treatment.

(B) “Alternative medical treatment” does not include use by a physician of controlled substances in the treatment of a person for chemical dependency resulting from the use of controlled substances.

(2) Employing any person to solicit patients for the licensee. However, a managed care organization, independent practice association, preferred provider organization or other medical service provider organization may contract for patients on behalf of physicians.

(3) Representing to a patient that a manifestly incurable condition of sickness, disease or injury can be cured.

(4) Obtaining any fee by fraud or misrepresentation.

(5) Willfully or negligently divulging a professional secret without the written consent of the patient.

(6)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, conviction of any offense punishable by incarceration in a Department of Corrections institution or in a federal prison, subject to ORS 670.280. A copy of the record of conviction, certified to by the clerk of the court entering the conviction, shall be conclusive evidence of the conviction.

(b) The board may not suspend or revoke a person’s license, or refuse to grant a license to a person, because of a conviction resulting solely from the person’s provision of a reproductive or gender-affirming health care service that is otherwise lawful in this state but unlawful in the jurisdiction in which the person provided the service, so long as the service provided was performed in accordance with the standard of care applicable to the service.

(7) Impairment as defined in ORS 676.303.

(8) Fraud or misrepresentation in applying for or procuring a license to practice in this state, or in connection with applying for or procuring registration.

(9) Making statements that the licensee knows, or with the exercise of reasonable care should know, are false or misleading, regarding skill or the efficacy or value of the medicine, treatment or remedy prescribed or administered by the licensee or at the direction of the licensee in the treatment of any disease or other condition of the human body or mind.

(10) Impersonating another licensee licensed under this chapter or permitting or allowing any person to use the license.

(11) Aiding or abetting the practice of medicine or podiatry by a person not licensed by the board, when the licensee knows, or with the exercise of reasonable care should know, that the person is not licensed.

(12) Using the name of the licensee under the designation “doctor,” “Dr.,” “D.O.” or “M.D.,” “D.P.M.,” “Acupuncturist,” “P.A.” or any similar designation in any form of advertising that is untruthful or is intended to deceive or mislead the public.

(13) Gross negligence or repeated negligence in the practice of medicine or podiatry.

(14) Incapacity to practice medicine or podiatry. If the board has evidence indicating incapacity, the board may order a licensee to submit to a standardized competency examination. The licensee shall have access to the result of the examination and to the criteria used for grading and evaluating the examination. If the examination is given orally, the licensee shall have the right to have the examination recorded.

(15)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, disciplinary action by another state of a license to practice, based upon acts by the licensee similar to acts described in this section. A certified copy of the record of the disciplinary action of the state is conclusive evidence thereof.

(b) The board may not suspend or revoke a person’s license, or refuse to grant a license to a person, because of a disciplinary action by another state resulting solely from the person’s provision of a reproductive or gender-affirming health care service that is otherwise lawful in this state but unlawful in the jurisdiction in which the person provided the service, so long as the service provided was performed in accordance with the standard of care applicable to the service.

(16) Failing to designate the degree appearing on the license under circumstances described in ORS 677.184 (3).

(17) Willfully violating any provision of this chapter or any rule adopted by the board, board order, or failing to comply with a board request pursuant to ORS 677.320.

(18) Failing to report the change of the location of practice of the licensee as required by ORS 677.172.

(19) Imprisonment as provided in ORS 677.225.

(20) Making a fraudulent claim.

(21)(a) Performing psychosurgery.

(b) For purposes of this subsection and ORS 426.385, “psychosurgery” means any operation designed to produce an irreversible lesion or destroy brain tissue for the primary purpose of altering the thoughts, emotions or behavior of a human being. “Psychosurgery” does not include procedures which may produce an irreversible lesion or destroy brain tissues when undertaken to cure well-defined disease states such as brain tumor, epileptic foci and certain chronic pain syndromes.

(22) Refusing an invitation for an informal interview with the board requested under ORS 677.415.

(23) Violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act.

(24) Prescribing controlled substances without a legitimate medical purpose, or prescribing controlled substances without following accepted procedures for examination of patients, or prescribing controlled substances without following accepted procedures for record keeping.

(25) Providing written documentation for purposes of ORS 475C.783 without having legitimately diagnosed a debilitating medical condition, as defined in ORS 475C.777, or without having followed accepted procedures for the examination of patients or for keeping records.

(26) Failure by the licensee to report to the board any adverse action taken against the licensee by another licensing jurisdiction or any peer review body, health care institution, professional or medical society or association, governmental agency, law enforcement agency or court for acts or conduct similar to acts or conduct that would constitute grounds for disciplinary action as described in this section.

(27) Failure by the licensee to notify the board of the licensee’s voluntary resignation from the staff of a health care institution or voluntary limitation of a licensee’s staff privileges at the institution if that action occurs while the licensee is under investigation by the institution or a committee thereof for any reason related to medical incompetence, unprofessional conduct, physical incapacity or impairment. [Amended by 1957 c.681 §5; 1961 c.400 §5; 1967 c.470 §30; 1969 c.684 §15; 1973 c.616 §16; 1975 c.776 §8; 1975 c.796 §2a; 1979 c.744 §50; 1981 c.372 §4; 1983 c.470 §4; 1983 c.486 §22; 1987 c.320 §244; 1989 c.830 §10; 1991 c.485 §5; 1995 s.s. c.2 §1; 1997 c.792 §20; 2007 c.351 §4; 2009 c.756 §23; 2017 c.21 §71; 2023 c.228 §32]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 43 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1963–2026 · leading case: Sachdev v. Or. Med. Bd., 426 P.3d 118 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Sachdev v. Or. Med. Bd., 426 P.3d 118 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 57× “The board imposed those sanctions on the basis that licensee violated several provisions of ORS 677.190 by violating an interim stipulated order (ISO) and, among other things, breaching the standard of care in the course of prescribing controlled substances.”

Humphers v. First Interstate Bank, 696 P.2d 527 (Or. 1985). · cites it 7× “” The Court of Appeals thought that breach of this statutory provision could not lead *721 to civil liability when such liability would be quite inappropriate to other provisions of ORS 677.190, but that misses the point. The actionable wrong is the breach of duty in a…”

Spray v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 624 P.2d 125 (Or. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 10× “The statutory basis for the suspension or revocation of a physician’s license is ORS 677.190, which provides, in pertinent part, "The board may suspend or revoke a license to practice medicine in this state for any of the following reasons: "(1) Unprofessional or dishonorable…”

Read v. Oregon Med. Bd., 260 P.3d 771 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 8× “” 4 The current number is ORS 677.190(17). 5 The e-mail that petitioner sent to CPEP read, in part: “I have been ORDERED by the Oregon Board of Medical Examiners, to schedule ‘evaluation’ at your facility, although I would prefer NOT to travel to Denver, if that is possible.”

Humphers v. First Interstate Bank, 684 P.2d 581 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 6× “here is no civil liability for "employing any person to solicit patients for the licensee," "habitual or excessive use of intoxicants, drugs or controlled substances," "using the name of the licensee under the designation `doctor' * * * with reference to the commercial…”

Anderson v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 770 P.2d 947 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 8× “The order was based on ORS 677.190(18) and (23), which provide, respectively, that a revocation may be based on a physician’s: “(18) Wilfully violating any provision of this chapter or any rule adopted by the board.”

Bd. of Med. Examiners v. Mintz, 378 P.2d 945 (Or. 1963). · cites it 6× “Phyllis Fogel that he would perform abortions upon each of them for fees varying from $15 to $25; that he administered drugs to them for the purpose of performing an abortion, and that this conduct was contrary to the provisions of ORS 677.190 which sets forth the grounds for…”

Paul v. Providence Health Sys.-Oregon, 240 P.3d 1110 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 5× “First Interstate Bank, 298 Or 706 , 696 P2d 527 (1985), which, in turn, implicates ORS 677.190(5). In Humphers , the plaintiff, a mother who had placed her daughter for adoption, brought an action against the physician who had attended the birth of the daughter, seeking…”

Greenberg v. Myers, 127 P.3d 1192 (Or. 2006). · cites it 4× “a person performing an abortion on an unemancipated minor or a ward to comply with section 3 of this 2005 Act [stating notification requirement]: “(a) Gives rise to civil liability for all damages in favor of a parent of the minor or ward; and “(b) Provides the Board of Medical…”

Grobovsky v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 159 P.3d 1245 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 7× “After the hearing, the ALJ issued a proposed order in which she found that petitioner had failed to obey the board’s evaluation order and that she thereby had violated ORS 677.190(1) and (18). Because petitioner no longer was licensed to practice medicine in Oregon, the ALJ…”

Zavalas v. State Ex Rel. Dep't of Corr., 861 P.2d 1026 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 4× “[1] ORS 677.190(25) provides that the Board of Medical Examiners may suspend or revoke a license to practice medicine in Oregon for "prescribing controlled substances * * * without following accepted procedures for examination of patients * * *.”

Booth v. Tektronix, Inc., 823 P.2d 402 (Or. 1991). · cites it 4× “See also ORS 677.190, which provides: "The Board of Medical Examiners for the State of Oregon may refuse to grant, or may suspend or revoke a license to practice issued under this chapter for any of the following reasons: "* * * * * "(5) Willfully or negligently divulging a…”

Show all 43 citing cases →

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(1) — 11 cases

Spray v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 624 P.2d 125 (Or. Ct. App. 1981). “The statutory basis for the suspension or revocation of a physician’s license is ORS 677.190, which provides, in pertinent part, "The board may suspend or revoke a license to practice medicine in this state for any of the following reasons: "(1) Unprofessional or dishonorable…”

McKay v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 788 P.2d 476 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).

Gallant v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 974 P.2d 814 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).

Lee v. State of Or., 891 F. Supp. 1429 (D. Or. 1995).

Grobovsky v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 159 P.3d 1245 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “After the hearing, the ALJ issued a proposed order in which she found that petitioner had failed to obey the board’s evaluation order and that she thereby had violated ORS 677.190(1) and (18). Because petitioner no longer was licensed to practice medicine in Oregon, the ALJ…”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(1)(a) — 3 cases

Sachdev v. Or. Med. Bd., 426 P.3d 118 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). “The board imposed those sanctions on the basis that licensee violated several provisions of ORS 677.190 by violating an interim stipulated order (ISO) and, among other things, breaching the standard of care in the course of prescribing controlled substances.”

Miller v. Bd. of Psychologist Examiners, 91 P.3d 786 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(1)(b) — 1 case

Gambee v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 923 P.2d 679 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(10) — 1 case

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(11) — 1 case

Gambee v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 923 P.2d 679 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(13) — 2 cases

Gambee v. Oregon Med. Bd., 322 P.3d 1107 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(16) — 1 case

McKay v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 788 P.2d 476 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(17) — 4 cases

Sachdev v. Oregon Med. Bd., 494 P.3d 1018 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).

Read v. Oregon Med. Bd., 260 P.3d 771 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “” 4 The current number is ORS 677.190(17). 5 The e-mail that petitioner sent to CPEP read, in part: “I have been ORDERED by the Oregon Board of Medical Examiners, to schedule ‘evaluation’ at your facility, although I would prefer NOT to travel to Denver, if that is possible.”

Gambee v. Oregon Med. Bd., 322 P.3d 1107 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(18) — 3 cases

Anderson v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 770 P.2d 947 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). “The order was based on ORS 677.190(18) and (23), which provide, respectively, that a revocation may be based on a physician’s: “(18) Wilfully violating any provision of this chapter or any rule adopted by the board.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(2) — 2 cases

Megdal v. Oregon State Bd. of Dental Examiners, 586 P.2d 816 (Or. Ct. App. 1978).

Ward v. Oregon State Bd. of Nursing, 502 P.2d 265 (Or. Ct. App. 1973).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(22) — 1 case

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(23) — 5 cases

McNiel v. Cooper, 241 S.W.3d 886 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007).

Abbott v. Kansas Bd. of Examiners in Optometry, 1 P.3d 318 (Kan. 2000).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(24) — 2 cases

OR-OSHA v. Loy Clark Pipeline, Co., 514 P.3d 544 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(25) — 1 case

Zavalas v. State Ex Rel. Dep't of Corr., 861 P.2d 1026 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). “[1] ORS 677.190(25) provides that the Board of Medical Examiners may suspend or revoke a license to practice medicine in Oregon for "prescribing controlled substances * * * without following accepted procedures for examination of patients * * *.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(4) — 1 case

Hofer v. OHSU, 511 P.3d 414 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(4)(a) — 1 case

Murphy v. Goss, 103 F. Supp. 3d 1234 (D. Or. 2015).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(5) — 10 cases

Humphers v. First Interstate Bank, 696 P.2d 527 (Or. 1985). “” The Court of Appeals thought that breach of this statutory provision could not lead *721 to civil liability when such liability would be quite inappropriate to other provisions of ORS 677.190, but that misses the point. The actionable wrong is the breach of duty in a…”

Paul v. Providence Health Sys.-Oregon, 240 P.3d 1110 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “First Interstate Bank, 298 Or 706 , 696 P2d 527 (1985), which, in turn, implicates ORS 677.190(5). In Humphers , the plaintiff, a mother who had placed her daughter for adoption, brought an action against the physician who had attended the birth of the daughter, seeking…”

Humphers v. First Interstate Bank, 684 P.2d 581 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). “here is no civil liability for "employing any person to solicit patients for the licensee," "habitual or excessive use of intoxicants, drugs or controlled substances," "using the name of the licensee under the designation `doctor' * * * with reference to the commercial…”

United States v. Steven Gene Chase, 340 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2003).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(7) — 1 case

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(H) — 1 case

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(l)(a) — 8 cases

Murphy v. Oregon Med. Bd., 348 P.3d 1173 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).

Eusterman v. Nw. Permanente, P.C., 129 P.3d 213 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(l)(b) — 1 case

Gambee v. Oregon Med. Bd., 322 P.3d 1107 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(l)(b)(A) — 1 case

Gambee v. Oregon Med. Bd., 322 P.3d 1107 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.190(l)(b)(A)(iii) — 1 case

Gambee v. Oregon Med. Bd., 322 P.3d 1107 (Or. Ct. App. 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.