Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Levine

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION


March 7, 2008

IN THE MATTER OF BENJAMIN LEVINE, M.D.

On appeal from New Jersey State Board of Medical Examiners.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Argued February 13, 2008

Before Judges Skillman and Winkelstein.

Appellant Benjamin Levine, M.D., appeals from a March 14, 2007 final decision of the Board of Medical Examiners, which denied appellant's motion for reinstatement of his medical license and continued the suspension of that license. Appellant presents the following arguments in support of his appeal:

I. THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT HANDED DOWN A DECISION THAT GOVERNMENT ISSUED CONSENT ORDERS ARE CONSTRUED AS CONTRACTS, BUT THE MEDICAL BOARD STATED LEVINE'S CONSENT ORDER IS NOT A CONTRACT, REVEALING FAILURE TO ABIDE BY THE LAW OF THE LAND.

II. CONSTRUCTION OF A STATUTE BY A COURT MUST RATIONALIZE THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATURE TO MAKE SURE THE INTENT IS FAIR AND REASONABLE. A COURT MUST NOT EVADE A STATUTE TO DO HARM THAT IS NOT INTENDED BY THE LEGISLATURE.

III. LEVINE'S ANSWERS ON HIS APPLICATION FOR MALPRACTICE INSURANCE WERE TRUE AS THE TWO INDICTMENTS WERE VOID AB INITIO BASED ON THE FILING OF A FEDERAL REMOVAL UNDER TITLE 28 § 1443(1).

IV. THE NEW JERSEY LAW REQUIRING MALPRACTICE INSURANCE FOR A LICENSE TO PRACTICE MEDICINE VIOLATES BOTH THE STATE AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONS, FOR IT FAILS TO PROVIDE A MEANS BY WHICH A WILLING AND ABLE PHYSICIAN CAN OBTAIN THAT INSURANCE OR CREDIT.

V. THE LAW REQUIRES THE MEDICAL BOARD TO HAVE CLEAR PROOF OF UNETHICAL OR IMMORAL BEHAVIOR BEFORE IT SUSPENDS A LICENSE AND IN THE CASE OF CRIMINAL CHARGES THERE MUST BE A CONVICTION.

VI. PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT IS NOT CLEARLY DEFINED AND THE DISCRETION OF THE MEDICAL BOARD BASED ON THE ISSUE INVOLVED WILL DECIDE IF PUNISHMENT WILL BE ADMINISTERED.

We reject these arguments and affirm the Board's final decision substantially for the reasons set forth in that decision.

Appellant's arguments do not warrant any additional discussion. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(D),(E).

Affirmed.

20080307

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.