State ex rel. Walker v. State Board of Health

• Decision Date: 20 April 1933
• Docket Number: 30830
• Citation: 61 S.W.2d 925
• Parties: STATE ex rel. WALKER v. STATE BOARD OF HEALTH et al
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

61 S.W.2d 925

STATE ex rel. WALKER v. STATE BOARD OF HEALTH et al

No. 30830

Supreme Court of Missouri, Second Division

April 20, 1933

Rehearing Overruled June 24, 1933.

J Henry Caruthers, of St. Louis, for appellant.

Stratton Shartel, Atty. Gen. (A. B. Lovan, of Kansas City, of counsel), for respondents.

OPINION

FITZSIMMONS, Commissioner.

Appellant, William F. Walker, sought by mandamus in the circuit court of Cole county to compel respondents, the members of the state board of health of Missouri, to issue to him a license to practice medicine and surgery in this state. A trial was had upon the issues raised by the alternative writ and respondents' return. Judgment was given denying the writ and dismissing appellant's petition. From this judgment he appealed to this court.

The gist of appellant's complaint is that the Arkansas eclectic medical board on October 15, 1923, granted to him a license to practice medicine in Arkansas; that he practiced in that state for not less than one year; that section 9113, Mo. Stat. Ann. 1929, provides for reciprocal admission to practice in this state without examination of legally qualified practitioners of medicine in other states; that Arkansas is entitled to reciprocity under that section of our statutes, but that, notwithstanding this statute, respondents, constituting the state board of health of Missouri, failed and refused, in March, 1929, to issue to appellant a license on reciprocity from Arkansas to practice medicine and surgery in Missouri, although he made written and oral application for such license. In support of his charge that respondents acted arbitrarily, unreasonably, and capriciously, appellant pleaded and proved that, on January 2, 1929, they granted without examination licenses to four other applicants on the basis of licenses previously issued by the Arkansas eclectic medical board.

Appellant showed that, on June 6, 1922, he finished a four-year course of medicine and surgery at, and graduated from, the St. Louis College of Physicians and Surgeons of Missouri; that thereafter he attended the Kansas City College of Medicine and Surgery one term beginning in April, 1923, and was granted a diploma by the latter college October 12, 1923; that immediately thereafter he filed his application with the Arkansas eclectic medical board for an examination, and that, on October 15, 1923, on the basis of this examination, he was granted a license to practice medicine and surgery in Arkansas. The respondents brought out that, from the time of his graduation from the St. Louis College of Physicians and Surgeons in June, 1922, until June 25, 1923, the effective date of an act approved March 27, 1923, relating to the examination of persons desiring to practice medicine and surgery, appellant, by reason of his graduation from the St. Louis College, was entitled to take an examination before the Missouri state board, but that he did not do so. Appellant testified that he did not take the Missouri examination at that time because he understood he would not pass it, and that he took the eclectic course at the Kansas City College of Medicine and Surgery in 1923 in order that he might qualify to take an examination before the Arkansas eclectic state medical board. Appellant and his wife were born in St. Louis, Mo., and his wife did not desire to live in Arkansas.

I. We are of opinion that the respondents acted within their sound discretion in rejecting appellant's application for a license to practice medicine in Missouri without an examination, and therefore that a writ of mandamus should not issue. The governing statute, section 9113, Mo. St. Ann 1929, provides that all persons desiring to practice medicine in this state shall appear before the state board of health, to be examined as to their fitness to engage in such practice. Persons so appearing for examination shall make application in writing, shall furnish satisfactory evidence of certain prescribed preliminary qualifications, and also of a stated period of attendance at and graduation from some reputable medical college. The section prescribes the scope and the method of the examination, and it contains the following provisos as to the admission of certain persons without examination (section 9113, pp. 5076, 5077, vol. 7, Ann. St.): 'Provided, that in determining the qualifications necessary for registration as a qualified physician the state board of health may, at its discretion, accept the certificate of the national board of medical examiners of the United States, chartered under the laws of the District of Columbia, in lieu of and as equivalent to its own professional examination. Every applicant for a license upon the basis of such certificate shall, upon making application showing necessary qualifications, as above set out, be required to pay...