Chapter 677
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Extent of
grandfather right under 1969 Act amending barbers law, (1972) Vol 36, p 23; licensing requirements for hospital
technicians employed by state correctional facilities, (1987) Vol 45, p 188
677.010
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Licensed physical
therapist perform electromyography tests, (1974) Vol
37, p 61
677.060
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Authority of
chiropractor to practice obstetrics, (1972) Vol 35, p
1267; administration of medication by psychiatric aide, (1975) Vol 37, p 478
677.065
See
annotations under ORS 677.515.
677.080
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Authority of
chiropractor to practice obstetrics, (1972) Vol 35, p
1267; authority of midwives to practice, (1977) Vol
38, p 967
677.082
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 43 WLR 363 (2007)
677.085
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Acupuncture
constitutes the practice of medicine under this section. State v. W. Sam Won,
19 Or App 580, 528 P2d 594 (1974), Sup Ct review denied
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Authority of
chiropractor to practice obstetrics, (1972) Vol 35, p
1267; necessity of specific authorization from the physician before a
pharmacist may substitute an equivalent product for specified brand name
prescriptions, (1973) Vol 36, p 524; administration
of medication by psychiatric aide, (1975) Vol 37, p
478; performance of episiotomy by midwives, (1977) Vol
38, p 967
677.095
NOTES OF DECISIONS
This
section is addressed to standards relating to medical malpractice, so it was
improper to use it as standard to judge matters of physician license revocation.
Spray v. Bd. of Medical Examiners, 50 Or App 311, 624 P2d 125 (1981), as
modified by 51 Or App 773, 627 P2d 25 (1981)
“Error-of-judgment”
instruction is unduly confusing and obscures fact that defendant’s liability
for negligence turns on exercise of reasonable care and not on exercise of
judgment. Rogers v. Meridian Park Hospital, 307 Or 612, 772 P2d 929 (1989)
Under
Creasey v. Hogan, 292 Or 154, 637 P2d 114
(1981), key determination is that expert possess knowledge of what constitutes
proper medical treatment in similar community. Mosley v. Owens, 108 Or App 685,
816 P2d 1198 (1991), Sup Ct review denied
Whether
duty extends to third parties is not addressed by definition of nature of duty
toward patients. Zavalas v. Dept. of Corrections, 124
Or App 166, 861 P2d 1026 (1993), Sup Ct review denied
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 70 OLR 629 (1991)
677.097
NOTES OF DECISIONS
To
demonstrate compliance with this section, expert testimony may be required to
establish standard of practice of reasonable medical practitioner if patient
requests further explanation of procedures or treatment to be undertaken.
Tiedemann v. Radiation Therapy Consultants, 299 Or 238, 701 P2d 440 (1985)
This
section, setting forth steps physician shall follow in obtaining patient’s
informed consent, was intended to codify and clarify common law. Zacher v. Petty, 312 Or 590, 826 P2d 619 (1992)
For
“explanation” to be adequate, patient must be capable of understanding risks
of, and alternatives to, treatment and capable of using information in rational
decision-making process. Macy v. Blatchford, 330 Or 444, 8 P3d 204 (2000)
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 71 OLR 909 (1992);
42 WLR 563 (2006)
677.100
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Inquiry
under paragraph (1)(d) includes all conduct of a petitioner, within as well as
without the state, during the period between the time license registration is
changed to inactive and the filing of a request for active registration.
Campbell v. Bd. of Medical Examiners, 16 Or App 381, 518 P2d 1042 (1974), Sup
Ct review denied
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 54 OLR 383 (1975)
677.172
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Under former similar statute
Conduct
during period of inactive registration subject to review by board on
reapplication includes conduct within and without state. Campbell v. Bd. of
Medical Examiners, 16 Or App 381, 518 P2d 1042 (1974), Sup Ct review denied
677.188
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Board
of Medical Examiners need not promulgate administrative rules defining “unprofessional
or dishonorable conduct” when conduct giving rise to suspension of physician’s
license consisted of “wilful and consistent
utilization of medical service or treatment which is or may be considered
inappropriate or unnecessary.” Spray v. Bd. of Medical Examiners, 50 Or App
311, 624 P2d 125 (1981), modified 51 Or App 773, 627 P2d 25 (1981)
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 51 OLR 504-508
(1972)
677.190
NOTES OF DECISIONS
As
“wilful and consistent utilization of medical service
or treatment which is or may be considered inappropriate or unnecessary”
(grounds for suspension of physician’s license) is part of definition of
unprofessional or dishonorable conduct under this section, it is not conduct
which must be defined by administrative rule, but is rather conduct which must
be determined on individual case basis through testimony of qualified
physicians as to prevailing norm in medical community. Spray v. Bd. of Medical
Examiners, 50 Or App 311, 624 P2d 125 (1981), modified 51 Or App 773,
627 P2d 25 (1981)
Prohibition
against willfully or negligently divulging professional secret establishes duty
of secrecy in medical relationship, and breach of duty in confidential
relationship is actionable wrong. Humphers v. First
Interstate Bank, 298 Or 706, 696 P2d 527 (1985)
ORS
677.415 does not limit Board of Medical Examiners to one investigatory
interview and where petitioner’s license to practice medicine was revoked by
Board for failure to comply with investigatory interview, absent evidence in
form of record that interview would actually have been non-investigatory and
would have required contested case procedures, petitioner’s refusal to
participate was grounds for revocation of license. Anderson v. Board of Medical
Examiners, 95 Or App 676, 770 P2d 947 (1989), Sup Ct review denied
Defendant
hospital’s duty of confidentiality did not extend beyond patient to patient’s
family where facts disclosed did not concern family and did not arise out of
any family involvement in patient’s treatment. Doe v. Portland Health Centers,
Inc., 99 Or App 423, 782 P2d 446 (1989)
Where
petitioner had his license suspended or revoked in another state based upon
acts constituting unprofessional conduct within meaning of this section, it was
not necessary for Board of Medical Examiners to evaluate sufficiency of other
state’s proof of underlying conduct, nor was it required to engage in prior
rulemaking defining “unprofessional conduct” or “recognized standards of
ethics.” McKay v. Board of Medical Examiners, 100 Or App 685, 788 P2d 476
(1990)
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 51 OLR 504-508
(1972)
677.200
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Notice,
stating that physician had “consistently prescribed dangerous drugs to patients
in amounts and in a manner which is inappropriate to the treatment of such
patients and is not medically indicated,” constituted sufficient notice of
nature of proceedings against him, notwithstanding that notice failed to
provide reference to particular sections of statutes and rules involved.
Bennett v. Board of Medical Examiners, 31 Or App 467, 570 P2d 986 (1977), Sup
Ct review denied
Under
this section, physician and attorney should be afforded opportunity to appeal
and be heard at hearing on license revocation. Stalder
v. Bd. of Medical Examiners, 37 Or App 853, 588 P2d 659 (1978)
677.205
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Court
would not determine if probation condition that “licentiate shall not indulge
in any act which may be deemed to be act of sexual deviation” was beyond
statutory authority granted board by this section, where order revoking doctor’s
license did not interpret condition or state that it relied on condition. Stalder v. Bd. of Medical Examiners, 37 Or App 853, 588 P2d
659 (1978)
Assessment
of all “costs” of disciplinary proceeding as civil penalty is not limited to
costs recoverable under ORCP 68. Adams v. Board of Medical Examiners, 170 Or
App 1, 11 P3d 676 (2000)
677.265
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Where
doctor’s actions were taken as part of Board of Medical Examiner’s
consideration of complaints against medical practitioners, actions were immune
from antitrust liability. Patrick v. Burget, 800 F2d
1498 (1986)
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Requirements to
practice acupuncture, (1973) Vol 36, p 617
677.360
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 17 WLR 926 (1981)
677.365
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 17 WLR 934 (1981)
677.370
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 17 WLR 926 (1981)
677.415
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Where
doctor’s actions were taken as part of Board of Medical Examiner’s
consideration of complaints against medical practitioners, actions were immune
from antitrust liability. Patrick v. Burget, 800 F2d
1498 (1986)
Where
petitioner’s license to practice medicine was revoked by Board for failure to
comply with investigatory interview, and statute does not limit Board of
Medical Examiners to one investigatory interview, absent evidence in form of
record that interview would actually have been non-investigatory and would have
required contested case procedures, petitioner’s refusal to participate was
grounds for revocation of license. Anderson v. Board of Medical Examiners, 95
Or App 676, 770 P2d 947 (1989), Sup Ct review denied
677.425
NOTES OF DECISIONS
This
section does not apply to administrative proceedings brought by Board against
person who was subject of investigation or to information sought to be elicited
from person unconnected with Board concerning manner in which he was contacted
by Board investigators prior to filing complaint. Stalder
v. Bd. of Medical Examiners, 37 Or App 853, 588 P2d 659 (1978); Spray v. Bd. of
Medical Examiners, 50 Or App 311, 624 P2d 125 (1981), modified 51 Or App
773, 627 P2d 25 (1981)
677.505
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Administration of
medication by psychiatric aid, (1975) Vol 37, p 478
677.515
(formerly
677.065)
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Administration of
medication by psychiatric aide, (1975) Vol 37, p 478
677.805
See
also annotations under ORS 682.010 in permanent edition.
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Where
podiatrists brought Sherman Anti-Trust suit against health plan and others and
made sufficient factual showing on horizontal price-fixing and group boycott
issues, and case is rife with factual complexity, summary judgment should not
have been granted. Hahn v. Oregon Physician’s Service, 868 F2d 1022 (9th Cir.
1988)
677.810
See
annotations under ORS 682.020 in permanent edition.
677.820
See
annotations under ORS 682.040 in permanent edition.