Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Professional Discipline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Virginia Board of Dentistry accepts consent order revoking Dr. Daniel Chun’s license
Summary
On March 20, 2026, the Virginia Board of Dentistry voted unanimously by telephone to accept a consent order that revokes Dr. Daniel Chun’s license to practice dentistry in the Commonwealth; the decision resolved four disciplinary case numbers without a formal hearing.
The Virginia Board of Dentistry voted unanimously on March 20, 2026, to accept a proposed consent order revoking the license of Dr. Daniel Chun, D.D.S., resolving four disciplinary case numbers without proceeding to a formal hearing.
Rebecca Smith, the board’s adjudication consultant, presented the proposed consent order during a telephone special session convened at 5:15 p.m. The order was offered "in lieu of proceeding with the formal hearing," according to the board minutes. The session listed case numbers 241029, 242468, 245004 and 245182 as pertaining to Dr. Chun.
Dr. Bruce R. Hutchison, D.D.S., moved that the board accept the consent order to revoke Dr. Chun’s license. After an unspecified member seconded the motion, a roll-call vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously. The minutes record seven members present and note that a quorum was established. The board adjourned at 5:25 p.m.
The special session was conducted by telephone; attendees listed in the minutes included Sultan E. Chaudhry, D.D.S., president and presiding officer; board members Margaret F. Lemaster, R.D.H.; Richard Quigg, D.D.S.; J. Michael Martinez de Andino, J.D.; Emelia H. McLennan, R.D.H.; and Jennifer Szakaly, D.D.S. Executive Director Jamie C. Sacksteder, Discipline Case Manager Donna M. Lee, and Senior Assistant Attorney General James Rutkowski (board counsel) were present.
The board minutes do not state an effective date for the revocation or identify the member who seconded the motion. The record shows the board accepted the consent order in lieu of conducting a formal evidentiary hearing and took no further public actions during the call.
