# Lyness v. Com., State Bd. of Medicine

> Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · June 29, 1989 · 127 Pa. Commw. 225

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9752548

## Case

- **Full name:** Samuel S. LYNESS, M.D., Petitioner, v. COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, STATE BOARD OF MEDICINE, Respondent
- **Court:** Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** June 29, 1989
- **Citations:** 127 Pa. Commw. 225; 561 A.2d 362; 1989 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 460
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Crumlish
- **Judges:** Crumlish, Craig, Barry, Colins, Palladino, McGinley, Smith, Doyle
- **Cited by:** 12 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Reversed on other grounds by Lyness v. Com., State Bd. of Medicine, 529 Pa. 535 (1992).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9752548

## Opinion text

CRUMLISH, Jr., President Judge.
I respectfully dissent.
*244 As the majority notes, “[t]he Board followed its standard operating procedure in prosecuting and adjudicating this matter.” (Footnote omitted). The majority also notes that the Board not only made the initial decision to issue a complaint against Lyness, but ultimately adjudicated that complaint by ordering, without an evidentiary hearing or oral argument, a harsher sanction than that imposed by the hearing examiner. Such involvement constitutes an impermissible commingling of prosecutorial and adjudicatory functions under Dussia v. Barger, 466 Pa. 152 , 351 A.2d 667 (1975).
Thus, for the reasons more fully explained in my dissent in Bruteyn Appeal, 32 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 541, 380 A.2d 497 (1977), I would reverse.
COLINS, J., joins in this dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9752548. Public record. Not legal advice.