My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-08-11_ENFORCEMENT - M1977300
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Minerals
>
M1977300
>
2011-08-11_ENFORCEMENT - M1977300
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:36:47 PM
Creation date
10/17/2011 12:01:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977300
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
8/11/2011
Doc Name
Joint Answer Brief
From
MLRB and DRMS
To
District Court
Email Name
DB2
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Colorado State Bd. of Med. Exam'rs v. Lopez - Samayoa, 887 P.2d 8, 14 (Colo. 1994). The <br />December Order sought merely to enforce the August Order, and remedy the underlying <br />violations of the Act. It did not substantively alter the August Order. <br />The Lopez case is directly on point. Lopez involved a State Board of Medical Examiners <br />( "Medical Board ") order suspending Dr. Lopez's medical license and imposing corrective <br />actions as conditions for its reinstatement. Id at 11. Dr. Lopez filed an appeal shortly after the <br />Medical Board issued its order, but did not seek a stay. During the pendency of the appeal, the <br />Medical Board issued a second order that imposed four new corrective actions. The Lopez <br />Court held that the Medical Board's second order was invalid because it went beyond mere <br />enforcement and imposed additional substantive conditions. The Court held: <br />If the [Medical] Board had acted merely to enforce its first order, we would agree. Once <br />Dr. Lopez's notice of appeal was filed, in the absence of a stay pending appeal, the <br />[Medical] Board had limited jurisdiction, under Muck, Schnier, and Lay, to enforce its <br />first order. The Board did not have jurisdiction, under Anti - Discrimination Commission, <br />to substantively alter its original order, which is precisely what it did by purporting to <br />impose additional educational requirements in its second order. <br />Lopez, 887 P.2d at 15. <br />In this case, the Board sought to enforce its August Order and remedy the underlying <br />continuing violations of the Act by issuing a cease and desist and assessing civil penalties. In <br />contrast with the agency's action in Lopez, the Board here neither changed the corrective actions <br />nor imposed new corrective actions on Cotter. The December Order was squarely within the <br />limited scope of enforcement jurisdiction described in Lopez. <br />8 The additional corrective actions are summarized as follows: (1) begin a residency training program, <br />(2) become a board - certified specialist in a recognized area of medical practice, (3) no longer perform <br />major surgeries, and (4) no longer treat high -risk obstetrical patients. Id. <br />21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.