- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Administrative Law
- Date Filed: 04-04-2018
- Case #: A162267
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Aoyagi, J. for the Court; Egan, C.J.; Armstrong, J.; Ortega, J.; Hadlock, J.; DeVore, J.; Lagesen, J.; Tookey, J.; Garrett, J.; DeHoog, J.; Shorr, J.; James, J.; & Powers, J.
- Full Text Opinion
Dixon sought judicial review of the Oregon State Board of Nursing’s (hereinafter “Board”) revocation of her nursing license and nurse practitioner certificate. Dixon assigned error to the Board’s application of “a preponderance standard to the allegations involving fraud or deceit.” On appeal, Dixon relied on Bernard v. Bd. of Dental Examiners, 2 Or App 22 (1970) to argue that the proper standard for allegations of fraud or deceit is “clear and convincing evidence.” However, “the standard of proof for agency proceedings,” set by ORS 183.450(5), “is synonymous with the preponderance of the evidence standard.” Therefore, “the standard of proof that generally applies in agency proceedings . . . is the preponderance standard.” Gallant v. Bd. of Medical Examiners, 159 Or App 175, 185. Consequently, the Court overruled Bernard, finding that it “does not accurately state the applicable standard of proof in license revocation proceedings.” The Court held that the Board “correctly applied the preponderance standard of proof in [Dixon’s] license revocation proceeding, including as to allegations of fraud and deceit.” Affirmed.