Summary Suspension of an Impaired Dentist
The Maryland Board of Dental Examiners received an anonymous tip that Dr. Linda Park, a dentist in Frederick, has been practicing while impaired by opioids. Without a hearing, the Board's chair issued an order summarily suspending Dr. Park's license, finding 'an imminent danger to the public health, safety, or welfare.' The order was served on Dr. Park at her office on a Tuesday. The order stated that a hearing would be scheduled. Dr. Park retained counsel, who demanded an immediate evidentiary hearing and asked for the identity of the complainant. The Board scheduled a hearing 45 days later. Dr. Park's counsel argues the suspension violated due process because there was no pre-suspension hearing and the tip was anonymous. Dr. Park has no prior discipline and voluntarily entered a treatment program.
1. Was the Board's summary suspension permissible under Maryland law? Discuss the standard for emergency suspension.
Read the worked answer
Maryland law allows summary suspension without a prior hearing when the Board finds that the public health, safety, or welfare imperatively requires emergency action. The standard is high: the Board must have a reasonable basis to believe there is an imminent risk. An anonymous tip about opioid impairment, if corroborated by evidence (e.g., erratic behavior, arrest, hospital record), can support that finding.
However, summary suspension is a temporary deprivation, not a final decision. Due process requires a prompt post-suspension hearing. A 45-day delay may be challenged as not prompt; the Board should justify the delay or expedite. The dentist is entitled to notice of the charges and an opportunity to be heard.
The anonymous tip alone may be insufficient if it is the only evidence. The Board should investigate and document corroboration. If the Board relied solely on an uncorroborated anonymous tip, the suspension may be vulnerable on appeal.
2. What due process rights does Dr. Park have, and how should the anonymous tip be handled?
Read the worked answer
Dr. Park has the right to notice of the specific charges, counsel, an impartial hearing officer, the opportunity to present evidence and cross-examine, and a decision based on the record. She may also request the identity of the complainant, but anonymity may be protected during the investigation; the Board can use a confidential informant while still providing the substance of the allegations.
The Board should evaluate whether the emergency suspension should be lifted if she enters treatment and agrees to monitoring. Many states allow a diversion or monitoring program for impaired practitioners. Voluntary treatment is a mitigating factor but not a complete defense.
If the Board proceeds to revoke, it must prove the grounds by a preponderance of the evidence at a contested case hearing.
3. If the Board later seeks permanent revocation, what procedural steps apply?
Read the worked answer
Permanent discipline requires a contested case hearing under Maryland's Administrative Procedure Act, often referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings. The Board must give notice, allow discovery, and issue a proposed decision. The Board then makes the final decision.
Dr. Park can appeal an adverse final decision to the circuit court for the county where she practices, and then to the Court of Special Appeals. The standard of review is whether the decision is supported by substantial evidence and free of legal error.
A consent order is possible: e.g., suspension stayed, probation, treatment monitoring, and practice restrictions. If she completes treatment and complies, the Board may reinstate or close the case. The key is that due process applies at each stage.