Tuesday, March 11, 2014

Restoring A Soiled Reputation

 The Maine Supreme Judicial Court has reversed a judgment affirming a decision by the Board of Certification for Geologists and Soil Scientists that had concluded that a geologist had run afoul of the governing Code of Ethics by giving opinions in a report

...without being as thoroughly informed as might reasonably be expected.

The court

The Code of Ethics and the statutes governing the Board’s authority to impose discipline permit the Board to sanction a geologist for issuing an opinion that is the result of gross negligence, incompetence, or misconduct, see 10 M.R.S. § 8003(5-A)(A)(2); 32 M.R.S. § 4913(1)(B), or that contains a “false statement” or “false information,” 6 C.M.R. 02 070 003-3 § 2(F). Additionally, section 2(D) mandates that geologists issue their opinions only in situations where they have enough information to do so. However, the language of section 2(D) does not allow for the determination of an ethical breach when the Board’s conclusion is simply that the geologist’s opinion is not “reasonable” in light of the underlying data. Because the plain language of section 2(D) compels a contrary interpretation, we conclude that the Board committed an error of law in determining that Lippitt violated that section.

The board had imposed a "warning" and costs of $3,000 as sanctions. (Mike Frisch)

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_profession/2014/03/the-maine-supreme-judicial-court-has-reversed-a-judgment-affirmed-a-decision-by-the-board-of-certification-for-geologists-and.html

Comparative Professions | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef01a73d8d0686970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Restoring A Soiled Reputation:

Comments

Post a comment