The supreme court held that it was permissible for one assistant attorney general to represent a medical board in its quasi-judicial capacity and another assistant attorney general to prosecute the case before the board, unless there was a showing of actual bias. In this case, the assistant attorney general acting as the board’s legal counsel did not participate in the investigation or the preparation of allegations against the doctor and the assistant attorneys general were employed in different bureaus of the attorney general’s office, with different supervisors and wholly distinct functions