BRADLEY J. BROYLES, M.D., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the Department of Health's emergency suspension of Dr. Broyles' medical license under section 120.60(6), finding the Department adequately demonstrated immediate serious danger to public health on the face of the order.
An emergency suspension of a medical license under section 120.60(6) is proper when the Department demonstrates on the face of the order that the licensee's continued practice poses immediate serious danger to public health, safety, or welfare.
[1] An emergency suspension of a medical license under section 120.60(6) requires the Department to demonstrate on the face of the order that the licensee's continued practic…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDr. Broyles, a physician, challenged an emergency suspension of his medical license issued by the Department of Health pursuant to section 120.60(6), …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Public Health And Safety cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In his pro se petition, Dr. Bradley J. Broyles contests an order entered by the Department of Health suspending Dr. Broyles’ license to practice medicine on an emergency basis pursuant to section 120.60(6), Florida Statutes (1999). Broyles’ arguments, however, primarily contest the factual matters set out in the Department’s order. He does not advance any substantial argument that the order, on its face, fails to comply with section 120.60(6). As the Department notes, the statute provides that it may take emergency action against a licensee upon a finding “that immediate serious danger to the public health, safety, or welfare requires (such action).” § 120.60(6), Fla.Stat. (1999). The statute requires, in cases of summary suspension, that the Department promptly institute a formal suspension or revocation proceeding pursuant to sections 120.569 and 120.57, Florida Statutes (1999). It is in these formal proceedings that licensees, such as Dr. Broyles, may dispute the factual matters relied upon by the Department. Our review of the present order, however, indicates that the Department has amply demonstrated on the face of the order that Dr. Broyles’ continued medical practice would pose an immediate serious danger to public health, safety, or welfare.
AFFIRMED.
BOOTH, KAHN and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Steven A. Field, M.D. v. State, 902 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…nstitute a formal suspension or revocation proceeding pursuant to sections 120.569 and 120.57, Florida Statutes (1999). In these formal proceedings, licensees may dispute the factual matters relied upon by the Department. Broyles v. Dep’t of Health, 776 So. 2d 340, 341 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Section 120.60(6)(c) also provides that “[t]he agency’s findings of immediate danger, necessity, and procedural fairness are judicially reviewable.” In addition, under section 120.68(1): a party who is adversely affected…
-
ST. Michael's Acad., Inc. v. State, 965 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)…ure 9.100(c)(3). An emergency order suspending a license must be based upon particularized facts showing that the licensee’s continued operation would pose an immediate serious danger to public health, safety or welfare. Broyles v. Dep’t of Health, 776 So. 2d 340, 341 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Additionally, an emergency order suspending a license must present facts that: “i) the complained of conduct was likely to continue; ii) the order was necessary to stop the emergency; and iii) the order was sufficiently tai…
-
Valls v. Dept. of Health, 255 So. 3d 515 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)…to public health, safety or welfare, and that this conduct is likely to continue in the absence of the Order. Robin Hood Group, Inc. v. Fla. Office of Ins. Reg., 885 So. ---PAGE 7--- 2d 393, 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); Broyles v. Dep’t of Health, 776 So. 2d 340, 341 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). We further hold that the Order is narrowly tailored to be fair, as it does not prohibit Dr. Valls from performing all plastic surgery or all surgery in general; rather it restricts Dr. Valls’ license by specifically pro…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence