Page 2 of 2 Previous

Continued: Whistleblower: Chiropractic board, AG's office at odds over fraud case

  • Article by: ALEJANDRA MATOS , Star Tribune
  • Last update: October 7, 2013 - 2:08 PM

Olson and Kermit Fruechte, an assistant attorney general, assured the board they were receiving adequate legal representation and offered to answer any legal questions that the board has in the future, especially related to the Criminal Rehabilitation Act.

In an interview, Spicer said he agrees that the board is the ultimate decisionmaker, but said those decisions are always made with the advice of their attorneys in the back of their mind because if they deviate from that advice, the board may be “stepping out on a limb for which there is no support.”

“If they make a decision that is contrary to the AG’s advice, then they are put in a situation that they have to defend that position in court, even at the Supreme Court level. If that is the case, then the attorney general can decide if it will defend or not,” Spicer said. “For the board to make a decision that is contrary to the AG’s advice is a very dangerous move.”

When asked if the attorney general’s office would have defended a decision to deny Miland’s license, or place conditions of restitution, Wogsland said, “Absolutely.”


Alejandra Matos • 612-673-4028 • Twitter: @amatos12

  • get related content delivered to your inbox

  • manage my email subscriptions


Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters


Golden Gavel by Star Tribune

Countdown to great deals

Bid Sept. 21-29





question of the day

Poll: How do you feel about the decision to reinstate Adrian Peterson?

Weekly Question