Dawson v. Miss. State Bd. Of Massage Therapy
| Docket Number: | 2005-CC-00519-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-17-2006 Opinion Author: KING, C.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Discipline of massage therapist - Due process - Substantial evidence - Fines - Section 73-67-19 Judge(s) Concurring: LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., SOUTHWICK, IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE AND ROBERTS, JJ. Procedural History: Admin or Agency Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - STATE BOARDS AND AGENCIES |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 01-27-2005 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Bobby DeLaughter Disposition: DECISION OF THE MS STATE BOARD OF MASSAGE THREAPY WAS REVERSED AND RENDERED IN PART AND AFFIRMED IN PART. Case Number: 241-04-211-BD |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | SHIRLEY DAWSON |
GEORGE S. LUTER |
||
| Appellee: | MISSISSIPPI STATE BOARD OF MASSAGE THERAPY | LEYSER Q. HAYES & ONETTA WHITLEY |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Discipline of massage therapist - Due process - Substantial evidence - Fines - Section 73-67-19 |
| Summary of the Facts: | The Mississippi State Board of Massage Therapy found that massage therapist Shirley Dawson violated several rules governing massage therapists, and ordered her to pay a fine of $200, complete an ethics course, and be placed on probation for six months. Dawson appealed to the circuit court which reversed in part and affirmed in part. Dawson appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Due process A board member investigated the complaint against Dawson. On the day of the hearing, the board member voted with other board members to move into executive session in order to hold the investigative proceeding. She then testified at Dawson’s hearing. Dawson argues that the member’s participation in the investigation and the administrative hearing violated her due process right to a fair hearing. However, one’s due process rights are not violated simply because a Board acts in both an investigative and adjudicatory capacity. Issue 2: Substantial evidence The Board was faced with two conflicting accounts as to whether the massage client expressed that the massage was painful. The Board found that the client’s testimony was credible. Furthermore, Dawson has not rebutted the presumption in favor of the Board’s finding simply by denying the client’s allegations. Issue 3: Fines Dawson argues that the Board has no authority to impose fines against her. Since this issue was not raised on appeal to the circuit court, Dawson is procedurally barred from raising it now. In addition, section 73-67-19 confers upon the Board power to impose civil penalties. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
