Professional Licensing Appeal - Idaho

PROFESSIONAL LICENSING APPEAL — IDAHO

Overview

This template provides forms and guidance for seeking administrative review and district-court judicial review of Idaho professional-licensing action. Many boards are supported by the Idaho Division of Occupational and Professional Licenses (DOPL), but the board's organic statute and rules control the hearing right, deadline, decisionmaker, and reinstatement route. The Idaho Administrative Procedure Act supplies general contested-case and judicial-review procedure, subject to exceptions and other controlling law. Idaho Code §§ 67-5240 through 67-5279.

PART ONE: APPEAL COVER LETTER

[__/__/____]

[________________________________]
[________________________________]
[________________________________]
[Attorney Name / Petitioner Pro Se]

FOR PHYSICAL FILING WITH THE DISTRICT COURT

Clerk of the District Court
[________________________________] Judicial District
[________________________________] County
[________________________________]
[________________________________], Idaho [____]

Re: Petition for Judicial Review — [________________________________] v. [________________________________]
License Type: [________________________________]
License Number: [____]
Agency Decision Date: [__/__/____]

Dear Clerk:

Enclosed for filing please find the following documents:

☐ Petition for Judicial Review (Original and [____] copies)
☐ Filing fee
☐ Certificate of Service upon the agency and all other parties to the agency proceeding
☐ Application for Stay of Agency Order Pending Review (if applicable)
☐ Proposed Order on Stay (if applicable)
☐ Transcript designation and record-fee certification required by Idaho Rule of Civil Procedure 84(c)

This Petition is filed pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-5270 et seq., seeking judicial review of the final order of the [________________________________] dated [__/__/____].

Respectfully submitted,

_________________________________
[Attorney Name], Esq.
Idaho State Bar No. [____]
[________________________________]
[________________________________]
Phone: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]

PART TWO: PETITION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE [________________________________] JUDICIAL DISTRICT
OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF [________________________________]

PETITION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW

(Idaho Code §§ 67-5270 through 67-5279)

Petitioner [________________________________] ("Petitioner"), by and through [his/her/their] undersigned attorney [or pro se], respectfully petitions this Court for judicial review of the final order of Respondent [________________________________] ("Board") entered on [__/__/____], and in support thereof states:

I. PARTIES

1. Petitioner [________________________________] is a [licensed/applicant for licensure as a] [________________________________] in the State of Idaho, holding License No. [____], with a principal address at [________________________________].

2. Respondent [________________________________] is the licensing authority established under Idaho Code [________________________________], with its principal office at [________________________________].

II. JURISDICTION, VENUE, AND TIMELINESS

3. Under Idaho Code § 67-5270(3), a party aggrieved by a final order in a contested case decided by an agency other than the Industrial Commission or Public Utilities Commission is entitled to judicial review after complying with §§ 67-5271 through 67-5279, unless other law controls the particular matter.

4. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-5272. [Select applicable basis:]
   ☐ The district court of the county in which the hearing was held
   ☐ The district court of the county where the final agency action was taken
   ☐ The district court of the county where Petitioner resides or operates its principal place of business in Idaho
   ☐ The district court of the county where property that was the subject of the decision is located
   ☐ Other venue required by controlling law: [________________________________]

5. The Board served [the final order / the order resolving reconsideration] upon Petitioner on [__/__/____]. This Petition is physically filed within twenty-eight (28) days after the applicable trigger under Idaho Code § 67-5273 and Idaho Rule of Civil Procedure 84.

6. Petitioner has exhausted all available administrative remedies as required by Idaho Code § 67-5271.

III. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

7. On or about [__/__/____], the Board issued a [Complaint / Notice of Charges / Accusation] against Petitioner alleging [________________________________].

8. Petitioner was given notice of the intended license action and an opportunity for an appropriate contested case in accordance with Idaho Code § 67-5254 and other controlling law.

9. A contested case hearing was conducted before [a Hearing Officer / the Board] on [__/__/____] [through [__/__/____]].

10. On [__/__/____], the [Hearing Officer issued a Preliminary Order / Board issued its Final Order] [recommending / ordering] [________________________________].

11. [If applicable:] On [__/__/____], [Petitioner / the Board] filed [a petition for review of a Preliminary Order under Idaho Code § 67-5245 / a motion for reconsideration under § 67-5243(3) or § 67-5246(4)].

12. On [__/__/____], the Board issued its Final Order ordering [________________________________].

13. [Petitioner filed / did not file] a motion for reconsideration on [__/__/____]. [The motion was denied on [__/__/____] / The agency failed to grant or deny the motion within twenty-one (21) days.]

IV. ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW

14. Whether the Board's order is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole.

15. [________________________________]

16. [________________________________]

17. [________________________________]

V. STANDARD OF REVIEW (Idaho Code § 67-5279)

18. Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-5279(3), the Court shall affirm the agency action unless the Court finds that the agency's findings, inferences, conclusions, or decisions are:

☐ In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions
☐ In excess of the statutory authority of the agency
☐ Made upon unlawful procedure
☐ Not supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole
☐ Arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion

19. Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-5279(1), the Court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the agency as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact.

20. Under Idaho Code § 67-5279(4), agency action is affirmed unless the appellant's substantial rights were prejudiced. Under subsection (5), the Court interprets state law and rules de novo and does not defer to the agency's interpretation.

VI. GROUNDS FOR APPEAL

Ground 1: [________________________________]

21. [________________________________]

22. [________________________________]

Ground 2: [________________________________]

23. [________________________________]

24. [________________________________]

Ground 3: [________________________________]

25. [________________________________]

26. [________________________________]

VII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court:

a. Set aside the Board's Final Order dated [__/__/____] in whole or in part and remand as necessary under Idaho Code § 67-5279;

b. [Reinstate Petitioner's license / Direct the Board to issue Petitioner's license / Remand the matter to the Board for further proceedings consistent with the Court's decision];

c. Stay enforcement of the Board's order pending the outcome of this judicial review, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-5274;

d. If Petitioner qualifies as the prevailing party defined by Idaho Code § 12-117(5), award the fees and costs recoverable under that subsection; and

e. Grant such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

Respectfully submitted,

_________________________________
[Attorney Name], Esq.
Idaho State Bar No. [____]
[________________________________]
[________________________________]
Phone: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]

Dated: [__/__/____]

PART THREE: MOTION FOR STAY OF AGENCY ORDER PENDING REVIEW

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE [________________________________] JUDICIAL DISTRICT
OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF [________________________________]

MOTION FOR STAY OF AGENCY ORDER PENDING JUDICIAL REVIEW

(Idaho Code § 67-5274)

Petitioner [________________________________], by and through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court for a stay of the final order of Respondent [________________________________] pending judicial review, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-5274, and states:

1. On [__/__/____], Respondent entered a final order [revoking / suspending / imposing conditions upon] Petitioner's [________________________________] license.

2. Petitioner timely filed a Petition for Judicial Review on [__/__/____].

3. Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-5274, the filing of a petition for judicial review does not automatically stay enforcement of the agency's order.

4. [Petitioner has / has not] requested a stay from the agency. [The agency granted / denied / failed to act on the stay request.]

5. Idaho Code § 67-5274 authorizes a stay on appropriate terms but does not enumerate a universal four-factor test. The controlling agency rule, court rule, order, or binding authority is [________________________________].

6. If that controlling source uses equitable factors, Petitioner addresses them as follows:

• Likelihood of Success / Serious Merits Question: [________________________________]

• Irreparable Harm: [________________________________]

• Balance of Harms: [________________________________]

• Public Interest: [________________________________]

7. Petitioner proposes the following stay terms: [________________________________].

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court enter an Order staying enforcement of the Board's final order pending the resolution of this judicial review.

Respectfully submitted,

_________________________________
[Attorney Name], Esq.

Dated: [__/__/____]

PART FOUR: STATEMENT OF ISSUES ON APPEAL

ISSUES FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW

Issue 1: [________________________________]

☐ Violation of constitutional or statutory provisions
☐ In excess of agency's statutory authority
☐ Made upon unlawful procedure
☐ Not supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole
☐ Arbitrary, capricious, or abuse of discretion

Supporting facts: [________________________________]

Issue 2: [________________________________]

☐ Violation of constitutional or statutory provisions
☐ In excess of agency's statutory authority
☐ Made upon unlawful procedure
☐ Not supported by substantial evidence
☐ Arbitrary, capricious, or abuse of discretion

Supporting facts: [________________________________]

Issue 3: [________________________________]

☐ Violation of constitutional or statutory provisions
☐ In excess of agency's statutory authority
☐ Made upon unlawful procedure
☐ Not supported by substantial evidence
☐ Arbitrary, capricious, or abuse of discretion

Supporting facts: [________________________________]

PART FIVE: GROUNDS FOR APPEAL — DETAILED ANALYSIS

A. Evidentiary Insufficiency

The Board's findings are not supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole because:

☐ The evidence was insufficient to establish the charged violations
☐ The Board credited unreliable testimony over contradictory documentary evidence
☐ The Board ignored exculpatory or mitigating evidence
☐ The expert testimony was insufficient or methodologically flawed
☐ The Board's factual findings are internally inconsistent
☐ The Hearing Officer's findings were better supported by the evidence, but the Board substituted its own findings
☐ Other: [________________________________]

B. Legal Error

The Board committed errors of law in that:

☐ The Board misinterpreted the governing statutes (Idaho Code § [____])
☐ The Board applied an incorrect standard of proof
☐ The Board failed to apply required elements of the charged violation
☐ The Board improperly shifted the burden of proof
☐ The Board relied upon unpromulgated rules or internal policies
☐ The Board misapplied IDAPA rules
☐ Other: [________________________________]

C. Procedural Defects

The proceedings were affected by unlawful procedure in that:

☐ Petitioner did not receive adequate written notice of the charges
☐ Petitioner was denied the right to present evidence or cross-examine witnesses
☐ The contested case hearing was not conducted in accordance with Idaho Code Title 67, Chapter 52
☐ The Board failed to follow its own administrative rules
☐ The Board considered ex parte communications
☐ A Board member with a conflict of interest participated in the decision
☐ The Board failed to issue written findings of fact and conclusions of law
☐ The Preliminary Order or Final Order was not properly served
☐ Other: [________________________________]

D. Constitutional Violations

☐ Due process — inadequate notice or opportunity to be heard (identify controlling constitutional provision and preserved facts)
☐ Due process — biased or prejudged tribunal
☐ Equal protection — disparate treatment (identify controlling constitutional provision and comparator evidence)
☐ Vagueness — the regulation or standard applied is unconstitutionally vague
☐ Other: [________________________________]

E. Disproportionate Sanction

☐ The Board failed to consider mitigating factors
☐ The sanction is harsher than warranted by precedent or guidelines
☐ The Board failed to consider alternatives to [revocation / suspension]
☐ The Board failed to consider rehabilitation or remedial measures
☐ Other: [________________________________]

PART SIX: HEARING PROCEDURES — IDAHO CONTESTED CASE PROCESS

A. License Actions and the Board's Organic Law

The specific board's Title 54 chapter or other organic law supplies the substantive grounds and may add procedures. As a general APA rule, Idaho Code § 67-5254 bars an agency from revoking, suspending, modifying, annulling, withdrawing, or amending a license—or refusing timely renewal of a continuing license—without notice and an opportunity for an appropriate contested case under the APA or another statute. The section preserves emergency action under § 67-5247.

For a timely and sufficient renewal application involving continuing activity, § 67-5254(2) generally continues the existing license through final agency determination and the stated review period, subject to the section's terms and other controlling law.

B. Contested Case Hearing Procedures (Idaho Code Title 67, Chapter 52)

1. Notice of Opportunity for Hearing. When a person is entitled by law to a contested-case hearing, § 67-5242(1) requires written notice identifying the action and authority and stating the procedure and time limit to request a hearing, with citations to governing rules.

2. Initial Pleading or Answer. Use the filing, answer, and default procedure stated in the notice, board rule, and current IDAPA 62.01.01. Do not assume a universal answer deadline.

3. Discovery. Idaho Code § 67-5251 governs evidence, not discovery. Identify any discovery or subpoena authority in the board's organic law, current IDAPA 62.01.01, an agency-specific rule, or a presiding-officer order before serving discovery.

4. Prehearing Conference. The Hearing Officer may schedule prehearing conferences to address preliminary matters.

5. Hearing. The contested case hearing is conducted before a Hearing Officer designated by the Board or by the Board itself. Witnesses are sworn and subject to cross-examination.

6. Order by a Non-Agency-Head Presiding Officer. Under § 67-5243, the presiding officer issues either a Recommended Order, reviewed under § 67-5244, or a Preliminary Order, which becomes final unless reviewed under § 67-5245. The order must identify its type.

7. Agency-Head Review. A party may request review of a Recommended Order under § 67-5244. For a Preliminary Order, the agency head may review on its own motion and, on a party's timely petition, generally must review under § 67-5245, subject to statutory limits or delegated review authority.

8. Final Order. The Board's order on review, or the Preliminary Order if not reviewed, becomes the Final Order.

9. Reconsideration. Unless another statute or rule controls, a party may move for reconsideration within fourteen days after service of a Recommended or Preliminary Order under § 67-5243(3), or after service of a Final Order issued by the agency head under § 67-5246(4). The motion is deemed denied if not disposed of within twenty-one days after filing.

C. Types of Agency Orders

Under Idaho Code §§ 67-5243 through 67-5246, there are several types of orders:

☐ Preliminary Order — issued by a non-agency-head presiding officer under § 67-5243; becomes final unless reviewed under § 67-5245
☐ Recommended Order — issued under § 67-5243; becomes final only after agency-head review under § 67-5244 and issuance of a Final Order
☐ Final Order — issued by the agency head directly or after review, or created when an unreviewed Preliminary Order becomes final under § 67-5246

D. Rules of Evidence

☐ The presiding officer may exclude irrelevant, unduly repetitious, constitutionally or statutorily excludable, or privileged evidence
☐ Other evidence may be admitted if it is of a type commonly relied on by prudent persons in conducting their affairs
☐ Documentary evidence may be received in copies or excerpts
☐ The presiding officer may take official notice of judicially cognizable facts and technical or scientific matters within the agency's specialized knowledge

E. Filing Deadlines for Judicial Review

The petition for judicial review generally must be physically filed within twenty-eight (28) days after the applicable trigger under Idaho Code § 67-5273 and Rule 84. Identify the order or action being reviewed, any timely reconsideration motion, the date and method of service, and the trigger that controls the calculation. Do not assume every case uses the same trigger.

PART SEVEN: STANDARD OF REVIEW — DETAILED GUIDANCE

Idaho Code § 67-5279 — Scope of Review

No Substitution of Judgment. Under Idaho Code § 67-5279(1), the court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the agency as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact.

Substantial Evidence Ground. Section 67-5279(3)(d) identifies agency findings, inferences, conclusions, or decisions not supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole as a ground for relief, subject to the substantial-rights requirement in subsection (4).

No Legal-Interpretation Deference. Idaho Code § 67-5279(5) directs the court to interpret state law and rules de novo without deferring to the agency's interpretation.

Arbitrary, Capricious, or Abuse-of-Discretion Ground. Section 67-5279(3)(e) lists agency action that is arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion as a ground for relief, subject to subsection (4).

Substantial-Rights Requirement. Even if a subsection (2) or (3) defect is shown, § 67-5279(4) requires prejudice to the appellant's substantial rights.

Relief. If the action is not affirmed, § 67-5279 directs that it be set aside in whole or part and remanded as necessary.

PART EIGHT: REINSTATEMENT / RESTORATION PETITION

PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT OF PROFESSIONAL LICENSE

To: [________________________________] Board
c/o Idaho Division of Occupational and Professional Licenses
[CURRENT BOARD-SPECIFIC FILING ADDRESS]
[________________________________]

Petitioner [________________________________] hereby petitions the [________________________________] Board for reinstatement of [his/her/their] [________________________________] license, License No. [____], and states:

1. Prior Disciplinary Action. On [__/__/____], the Board entered an order [revoking / suspending] Petitioner's license based upon findings of [________________________________].

2. Period of Discipline. Petitioner's license has been [revoked / suspended] since [__/__/____], a period of [____] [months/years].

3. Eligibility. Petitioner is eligible to apply for reinstatement pursuant to [the Board's order / Idaho Code § [____] / Board rules].

4. Compliance with Conditions. Petitioner has fully complied with all conditions imposed by the Board, including:
   ☐ Completion of required continuing education: [________________________________]
   ☐ Completion of remedial coursework or training: [________________________________]
   ☐ Payment of all fines, costs, and restitution: $[____]
   ☐ Completion of counseling, treatment, or rehabilitation: [________________________________]
   ☐ Supervised practice: [________________________________]
   ☐ Other: [________________________________]

5. Rehabilitation and Fitness. Petitioner is rehabilitated and fit to return to practice because [________________________________].

6. Character References. Attached are [____] character reference letters from [________________________________].

7. Current Good Standing.
   ☐ No criminal convictions since the disciplinary order
   ☐ No pending criminal charges
   ☐ No disciplinary actions in other jurisdictions
   ☐ No substance abuse issues (or successful completion of treatment)
   ☐ Maintained current professional knowledge

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board reinstate [his/her/their] license [with conditions / without conditions].

_________________________________
Petitioner / Attorney for Petitioner
Dated: [__/__/____]

PART NINE: FIND THE CURRENT BOARD AND FILING ROUTE

Many Idaho occupational and professional boards are supported by the Division of Occupational and Professional Licenses (DOPL). Before filing, use the current DOPL board page to confirm the board's legal name, organic statute, rules, filing address, electronic-filing permissions, fees, staff contact, and any board-specific appeal or reinstatement form.

• DOPL board directory and current contact information: https://dopl.idaho.gov/
• If the licensing authority is outside DOPL, use that authority's official site and organic law rather than this DOPL routing paragraph.

PART TEN: DOCUMENT CHECKLIST

Before Filing Petition for Judicial Review

☐ Confirmed final order has been received and date of service noted
☐ Determined whether motion for reconsideration is appropriate (14-day deadline)
☐ Calculated 28-day filing deadline under Idaho Code § 67-5273: Deadline is [__/__/____]
☐ Verified exhaustion of all administrative remedies
☐ Determined proper venue under § 67-5272: county of hearing, final agency action, Petitioner's Idaho residence or principal place of business, or subject property, unless another law controls
☐ Obtained copy of Board's Final Order
☐ Obtained copy of Hearing Officer's Preliminary Order (if applicable)
☐ Prepared Petition for Judicial Review
☐ Prepared Certificates of Service
☐ Calculated filing fee and prepared payment

Filing and Service

☐ Filed Petition with Clerk of the District Court
☐ Served the agency and every other party to the agency proceeding under Rule 84(d)
☐ Filed proof of service with the Court
☐ Included the transcript designation and certifications concerning service and estimated record/transcript fees required by Rule 84(c)
☐ Received file-stamped copy of Petition

Stay Proceedings (if applicable)

☐ Considered an agency stay request and confirmed whether another source requires it
☐ Prepared Motion for Stay under Idaho Code § 67-5274
☐ Prepared supporting affidavit or declaration
☐ Filed Motion with the Court
☐ Served the stay motion on the agency and all other parties as required by the applicable rules and court order
☐ Attended hearing on stay motion (if required)

Post-Filing

☐ Confirmed agency's transmission of the settled transcript and record within 42 days after service of the petition, unless statute or court order provides otherwise (Idaho Code § 67-5275; Rule 84(k))
☐ Reviewed record for completeness
☐ Filed any objections to record within applicable deadline
☐ Filed petition for additional evidence (Idaho Code § 67-5276), if needed
☐ Prepared opening brief per Court scheduling order
☐ Filed opening brief
☐ Received and reviewed Respondent's answering brief
☐ Filed reply brief (if permitted)
☐ Attended oral argument (if scheduled)

PART ELEVEN: PRACTICE TIPS FOR IDAHO LICENSING APPEALS

Timing and Deadlines

1. 28-Day Filing Deadline. Idaho Code § 67-5273 generally requires filing within 28 days after the applicable order or action, or within 28 days after service of the reconsideration decision. Rule 84(n) treats timely physical filing of the petition or cross-petition as jurisdictional and directs automatic dismissal when untimely. Calculate from the exact statutory trigger; do not substitute a mailing date.

2. Reconsideration. Unless another statute or rule controls, § 67-5246(4) permits a motion within 14 days after service of a Final Order issued by the agency head. Rule 84(b)(1)(B) suspends and restarts the judicial-review filing time when the agency has reconsideration authority and a timely motion is filed.

3. Preliminary vs. Final Orders. Pay careful attention to whether the Hearing Officer issues a Preliminary Order (which becomes final unless reviewed) or a Recommended Order (which is not effective until reviewed by the Board). Idaho Code §§ 67-5243, 67-5244.

Idaho-Specific Considerations

4. Venue Selection. Section 67-5272 lists the county where the hearing was held, where final agency action was taken, where the aggrieved party resides or operates its principal Idaho place of business, or where property that was the subject of the decision is located, unless another law controls.

5. Additional Evidence. Under Idaho Code § 67-5276, the court may remand to the agency to take additional evidence if the additional evidence is material and there were good reasons for failing to present it to the agency.

6. Attorney's Fees. For an administrative or judicial licensing proceeding between a licensing authority and licensee, Idaho Code § 12-117(5) entitles the prevailing party, as specially defined there, to reasonable attorney's fees and necessarily and actually incurred investigative or defense costs. Do not replace this licensing-specific rule with subsection (1)'s reasonable-basis test.

Strategic Considerations

7. Issue Preservation. Identify and preserve each issue under the governing statute, rules, and current Idaho authority. Do not assume the district court will consider an argument that was not properly presented to the agency.

8. Review Framework. Match each asserted defect to § 67-5279(2) or (3) and explain prejudice to substantial rights under subsection (4). Legal interpretation is de novo under subsection (5); factual weight remains governed by subsection (1).

9. Stay Pending Review. Under Idaho Code § 67-5274, the filing of a petition does not automatically stay the agency action. The court or the agency may grant a stay upon appropriate terms.

10. Further Appellate Review. Any appeal from the district court must follow the current Idaho Appellate Rules and case-specific finality requirements. Confirm the notice deadline and appellate routing from current official rules.

11. Current Administrative Rules. Check current IDAPA 62.01.01 and the licensing board's agency-specific rules. Coverage and procedure may differ by agency, and another law may control.

PART TWELVE: SOURCES AND REFERENCES

Statutes

• Idaho Administrative Procedure Act: Idaho Code Title 67, Chapter 52 — https://legislature.idaho.gov/statutesrules/idstat/Title67/T67CH52/
• Right of Review: Idaho Code § 67-5270
• Judicial Review Procedures: Idaho Code §§ 67-5271 through 67-5279
• Stay of Agency Action: Idaho Code § 67-5274
• Scope of Review: Idaho Code § 67-5279
• Record on Review: Idaho Code § 67-5275
• Additional Evidence: Idaho Code § 67-5276
• Attorney's Fees: Idaho Code § 12-117 — https://legislature.idaho.gov/statutesrules/idstat/Title12/T12CH1/SECT12-117/
• License Actions: Idaho Code § 67-5254

Court and Agency Resources

• Idaho Division of Occupational and Professional Licenses: https://dopl.idaho.gov/
• Idaho State Legislature (Statutes): https://legislature.idaho.gov/statutesrules/
• Idaho Rule of Civil Procedure 84: https://isc.idaho.gov/rules-procedure/print/ircp/84

Administrative Rules

• IDAPA 62.01.01, Idaho Rules of Administrative Procedure: https://adminrules.idaho.gov/rules/current/62/620101.pdf
• Current agency-specific licensing-board rules

This template is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Professional licensing disciplinary proceedings can have serious consequences for your livelihood and career. You should consult with a qualified Idaho attorney experienced in administrative law and professional licensing defense before using this template. Laws and procedures may change; verify all citations and requirements before filing.