California Court of Appeal

In a psychologist's challenge to the authority of the Board of Psychology to discipline him, the trial court's denial of a petition for writ of administrative mandamus is affirmed, where: 1) the Board had jurisdiction to discipline the petitioner for his conduct as a special master because he was acting as a psychologist in his special master role; 2) the petitioner's due process contentions failed because a) the rules, standards and guidelines for psychology practice gave him fair notice of prohibited conduct, and b) he failed to meet his burden of showing that there was no logical nexus between his unprofessional conduct and his fitness to practice the profession; and 3) substantial evidence supported the trial court's findings that the petitioner was dishonest.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/10/2012
• Published 05/10/2012

Judges

• Mauro

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• David Carico, Kerry Weisel