Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

STEINBACH, Petitioner, v. OREGON STATE BOARD OF PHARMACY, Respondent.

PER CURIAM

In this proceeding under ORS 183.400, petitioner challenges the validity of rules adopted by the State Board of Pharmacy (Board). He contends that the Board exceeded its statutory rule-making authority by adopting rules governing the use of support personnel in the practice of pharmacy. Subsequent to the initiation of this action, the legislature amended ORS 689.225 (4) to authorize the adoption of rules relating to the use of support personnel. Or Laws 1989, ch 608, § 2. Pursuant to that authority, the Board repealed the challenged rules and adopted new rules. It has filed a motion to dismiss petitioner's challenge, arguing that, because of the legislative and administrative actions, his objection is moot. We agree. See Cook v. Workers' Compensation Dept., 79 Or. App. 21, 717 P.2d 658 (1986).

Motion to dismiss rule challenge as moot granted.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

STEINBACH v. OREGON STATE BOARD OF PHARMACY
(Feb 21, 1990)