677.205
Grounds for discipline; action by board; penalties. (1) The Oregon Medical Board may
discipline as provided in this section any person licensed, registered or
certified under this chapter who has:
(a) Admitted the
facts of a complaint filed in accordance with ORS 677.200 (1) alleging facts
which establish that such person is in violation of one or more of the grounds
for suspension or revocation of a license as set forth in ORS 677.190;
(b) Been found to
be in violation of one or more of the grounds for disciplinary action of a
licensee as set forth in this chapter;
(c) Had an
automatic license suspension as provided in ORS 677.225; or
(d) Failed to
make a report as required under ORS 677.415.
(2) In
disciplining a licensee as authorized by subsection (1) of this section, the
board may use any or all of the following methods:
(a) Suspend
judgment.
(b) Place the
licensee on probation.
(c) Suspend the
license.
(d) Revoke the
license.
(e) Place
limitations on the license.
(f) Take such
other disciplinary action as the board in its discretion finds proper,
including assessment of the costs of the disciplinary proceedings as a civil
penalty or assessment of a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000, or both.
(3) In addition
to the action authorized by subsection (2) of this section, the board may
temporarily suspend a license without a hearing, simultaneously with the
commencement of proceedings under ORS 677.200 if the board finds that evidence
in its possession indicates that a continuation in practice of the licensee
constitutes an immediate danger to the public.
(4) If the board
places any licensee on probation as set forth in subsection (2)(b) of this
section, the board may determine, and may at any time modify, the conditions of
the probation and may include among them any reasonable condition for the
purpose of protection of the public or for the purpose of the rehabilitation of
the probationer, or both. Upon expiration of the term of probation, further
proceedings shall be abated if the licensee has complied with the terms of the
probation.
(5) If a license
issued under this chapter is suspended, the holder of the license may not
practice during the term of suspension. Upon the expiration of the term of
suspension, the license shall be reinstated by the board if the conditions for
which the license was suspended no longer exist.
(6) The board
shall enter each case of disciplinary action on its records.
(7) Civil
penalties under this section shall be imposed as provided in ORS 183.745. [1957
c.681 §8; 1967 c.470 §34; 1975 c.796 §3; 1983 c.486 §25; 1989 c.830 §13; 1991
c.734 §71; 2007 c.803 §3]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
12
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1975–2024 · leading case:
Read v. Oregon Med. Bd., 260 P.3d 771 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
Read v. Oregon Med. Bd., 260 P.3d 771 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 5× “The board issued a Complaint and Notice of Proposed Disciplinary Action to petitioner pursuant to ORS 677.205 for violations of the Medical Practice Act, specifically ORS 677.”
Sachdev v. Or. Med. Bd., 426 P.3d 118 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 4× “" The board finished its investigation and provided licensee with a complaint and notice of proposed disciplinary action against her under ORS 677.205. The complaint's allegations were divided into two parts.”
Sachdev v. Oregon Med. Bd., 494 P.3d 1018 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 3× “’ The board finished its investigation and provided licensee with a complaint and notice of proposed disci- plinary action against her under ORS 677.205.” Sachdev I, 292 Or App at 779-80 (footnote omitted).”
United States v. Steven Gene Chase, 340 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2003).
“Dieter might be answerable to the Oregon Board of Medical Examiners, which disciplines psychiatrists for violations of ethical rules, see Or.Rev. Stat. § 677.205 (2001). But Rule 501 is not implicated by an improper disclosure made outside of federal court proceedings.”
Murphy v. Oregon Med. Bd., 348 P.3d 1173 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 2× “The board brought a complaint and notice of proposed disciplinary action (complaint) against petitioner under ORS 677.205, alleging that he violated “ORS 677.”
Adams v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 11 P.3d 676 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 7× “That assessment was made pursuant to ORS 677.205(2)(f), which provides: “(2) In disciplining a licensee as authorized by subsection (1) of this section, the board may use any or all of the following methods: «* * * * * “(f) Take such other disciplinary action as the board in its…”
Johnson v. Eugene Emergency Physicians, P.C., 974 P.2d 803 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
““(2) Any person who reports or provides information to the board under ORS 677.205 and 677.410 to 677.425 and who provides information in good faith shall not be subject to an action for civil damages as a result thereof.”
Stalder v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 588 P.2d 659 (Or. Ct. App. 1978).
· cites it 3× “200: "Except as provided in paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of ORS 677.205 and ORS 677.202, any proceeding for suspension or revocation of a license to practice medicine in this state shall be substantially in accord with the following procedure: "(1) A written complaint of some…”
Thomas v. Harder (D. Or. 2023).
· cites it 8× “Within that framework, ORS § 677.205 requires that the OMB may only temporarily suspend a license without a hearing if it is done “simultaneously with the commencement of proceedings under ORS 677.”
Campbell v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 535 P.2d 96 (Or. Ct. App. 1975).
“202, any proceeding for suspension or revocation of a license to practice medicine in this state shall be substantially in accord with the following procedure: “(3) The hearing may be before the board or may be before three or more members or a qualified hearing officer…”
Paul Thomas v. Kathleen Harder (9th Cir. 2024).
· cites it 3× “Thomas argues that even if the Butz factors favor a finding of absolute immunity, OMB members are not entitled to absolute immunity because they violated state law, Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.205 (3), by issuing an emergency suspension before formally filing a verified complaint.”
Hawkins v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 542 P.2d 152 (Or. Ct. App. 1975).
“” ORS 677.205(1) (b). Under the provisions of ORS ch 677, as it existed prior to the effective date of the 1975 additions, in order for the Board to discipline a licensee for incapacity, it was necessary for the Board to reach that conclusion on the basis of proof of specific…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.205(1) — 1 case
Hawkins v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 542 P.2d 152 (Or. Ct. App. 1975).
“” ORS 677.205(1) (b). Under the provisions of ORS ch 677, as it existed prior to the effective date of the 1975 additions, in order for the Board to discipline a licensee for incapacity, it was necessary for the Board to reach that conclusion on the basis of proof of specific…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.205(2) — 1 case
Sachdev v. Or. Med. Bd., 426 P.3d 118 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
“" The board finished its investigation and provided licensee with a complaint and notice of proposed disciplinary action against her under ORS 677.205. The complaint's allegations were divided into two parts.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.205(2)(d) — 2 cases
Read v. Oregon Med. Bd., 260 P.3d 771 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“The board issued a Complaint and Notice of Proposed Disciplinary Action to petitioner pursuant to ORS 677.205 for violations of the Medical Practice Act, specifically ORS 677.”
Sachdev v. Oregon Med. Bd., 494 P.3d 1018 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
“’ The board finished its investigation and provided licensee with a complaint and notice of proposed disci- plinary action against her under ORS 677.205.” Sachdev I, 292 Or App at 779-80 (footnote omitted).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.205(2)(f) — 1 case
Adams v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 11 P.3d 676 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
“That assessment was made pursuant to ORS 677.205(2)(f), which provides: “(2) In disciplining a licensee as authorized by subsection (1) of this section, the board may use any or all of the following methods: «* * * * * “(f) Take such other disciplinary action as the board in its…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.205(3) — 2 cases
Sachdev v. Oregon Med. Bd., 494 P.3d 1018 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
“’ The board finished its investigation and provided licensee with a complaint and notice of proposed disci- plinary action against her under ORS 677.205.” Sachdev I, 292 Or App at 779-80 (footnote omitted).”
Thomas v. Harder (D. Or. 2023).
“Within that framework, ORS § 677.205 requires that the OMB may only temporarily suspend a license without a hearing if it is done “simultaneously with the commencement of proceedings under ORS 677.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 677.205(4) — 1 case
Stalder v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 588 P.2d 659 (Or. Ct. App. 1978).
“200: "Except as provided in paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of ORS 677.205 and ORS 677.202, any proceeding for suspension or revocation of a license to practice medicine in this state shall be substantially in accord with the following procedure: "(1) A written complaint of some…”
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.