O'DONNELL v. Board of Medical Examiners

THE COURT.

A complaint was filed against petitioner herein before the Board of Medical Examiners, wherein he was charged with unprofessional conduct as the same is defined under the terms of the first subdivision of section 14 of the Medical Practice Act, Deering’s General Laws, 1931, Act 4807.

After a hearing the board revoked appellant’s license to practice medicine. From such order of revocation a petition for writ of review was filed in the superior court, the writ was issued, and after a hearing a judgment was rendered affirming the decision of the Board of Medical Examiners. From that judgment petitioner herein has attempted to prosecute this appeal.

[81]

This motion is now made to dismiss the appeal upon the ground that the superior court was without jurisdiction to make or enter any order upon the application for writ of review except to deny the same. It is evident the appeal must be dismissed.

In

Standard Oil Co. of California

v.

State Board of Equalization,

6 Cal. (2d) 557 [59 Pac. (2d) 119], the court reaffirmed the rule and supported its finding by many authorities that a writ of

certiorari

will lie only to review the exercise of judicial functions (sec. 1068, Code Civ. Proc.), and that the legislature is without power in the absence of constitutional provision authorizing the same, to confer judicial functions upon a state-wide administrative agency of the character of the board of equalization.

In

Whitten

v.

State Board of Optometry,

8 Cal. (2d) 444 [65 Pac. (2d) 1296], following the case of

Standard Oil Co. of California

v.