Ex Parte Chad Bostick. (in Re Alabama Board of Examiners of Landscape Architects v. Chad Bostick)

Summary

The court reversed the Court of Civil Appeals and remanded, holding that the Board lacked statutory authority to discipline Bostick for receiving and retaining payments owed to his employer. Because the conduct arose from an employer-employee compensation dispute rather than the performance of professional landscape-architecture services, it did not occur in the statutory practice of landscape architecture. Justices Shaw and Bryan, dissenting, would have affirmed because receiving and retaining client payments was connected to Bostick’s professional role and subject to Board discipline.