- Court reinstates lawyer’s discipline for performing conflicting role in same transaction
- Reliance on hospital peer review report—inadmissible hearsay—dooms disciplinary decision
- Contracting, confidentiality, and anti-competitiveness problems affect accountancy board, sunset panel finds
- Federal court: Use of “engineer” label does not imply licensure status
- Board directors face salary cuts after Nevada AG says they can’t be paid more than governor
The Supreme Court of Queensland, Australia, in a May 19 decision, rejected the argument of a psychologist that, although he had engaged in unprofessional conduct by having a sexual relationship with a patient, his actions should be mitigated by the fact of what he claimed was a blackmail scheme by that patient against him.
The content you are trying to access is only available to members. Sorry.