Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 680.100 (2026)

Discipline of dental hygienist; grounds; method; procedure

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      680.100 Discipline of dental hygienist; grounds; method; procedure. (1) The Oregon Board of Dentistry may discipline any dental hygienist for any of the causes for which a dentist may be disciplined under ORS 679.140 and may impose any or all of the methods of discipline, modify such methods and reinstate dental hygiene licenses as provided in ORS 679.140 for dentists.

      (2) The provisions of ORS 679.160 and 679.250 apply to proceedings by the board for the revocation or suspension of or refusal to renew a license issued pursuant to ORS 680.010 to 680.205. [Amended by 1963 c.266 §9; 1975 c.323 §4; 1977 c.745 §52; 1983 c.169 §28; 1983 c. 338 §963; 1999 c.578 §5]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1980–1980 · leading case: Megdal v. Oregon State Bd. of Dental Examiners, 605 P.2d 273 (Or. 1980).
Megdal v. Oregon State Bd. of Dental Examiners, 605 P.2d 273 (Or. 1980). · cites it 2× “what constitutes unprofessional conduct, gross ignorance, incompetence or inefficiency" for dental hygienists or other dental assistants, ORS 680.100(1)(d), while its rulemaking authority for dentists is phrased in general terms.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 680.100(1)(d): 1 case
Megdal v. Oregon State Bd. of Dental Examiners, 605 P.2d 273 (Or. 1980). “what constitutes unprofessional conduct, gross ignorance, incompetence or inefficiency" for dental hygienists or other dental assistants, ORS 680.100(1)(d), while its rulemaking authority for dentists is phrased in general terms.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 680.100(l)(d): 1 case
Megdal v. Oregon State Bd. of Dental Examiners, 605 P.2d 273 (Or. 1980). “what constitutes unprofessional conduct, gross ignorance, incompetence or inefficiency" for dental hygienists or other dental assistants, ORS 680.100(1)(d), while its rulemaking authority for dentists is phrased in general terms.”
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.