
    Bret L. LUSSKIN, M.D., Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, BOARD OF MEDICINE, Appellee.
    No. 92-0251.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    Dec. 9, 1992.
    Rehearing and/or Clarification and Rehearing En Banc Denied Feb. 4, 1993.
    Administrative appeal from the Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Medicine.
    J. David Bogenschutz, of Bogenschutz & Dutko, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
    Lisa S. Nelson, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Dept, of Professional Regulation, Tallahassee, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

DOWNEY and DELL, JJ., concur.

ANSTEAD, J., dissents with opinion.

ANSTEAD, Judge,

dissenting.

This is a rather bizarre case involving allegations of professional and sexual misconduct by the appellant-physician. While there is substantial, perhaps overwhelming, evidence in the record to sustain the charges against appellant, the fact remains that the hearing officer, in detailed findings, found in the appellant’s favor. Because there is also evidence to support those findings, I would reverse and hold that the Department acted beyond its authority in setting aside the factual conclusions made by the hearing officer. Cf. Glover v. Sanford Child Care, Inc., 429 So.2d 91 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).  