Doran v. State Board of Medical Examiners
| Citation | Doran v. State Board of Medical Examiners, 78 Colo. 153, 240 P. 335 (Colo. 1925) |
| Decision Date | 05 October 1925 |
| Citation | 240 P. 335,78 Colo. 153 |
| Docket Number | 11323. |
| Parties | DORAN v. STATE BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied Nov. 2, 1925.
Department 3.
Error to District Court, City and County of Denver; Henley A Calvert, Judge.
Certiorari by J. E. Doran to review an order of the State Board of Medical Examiners revoking plaintiff's license. From a judgment dismissing the writ, plaintiff brings error.
Affirmed and supersedeas denied.
John Coen and R. L. Sauter, both of Sterling, and Clarence L Ireland, of Denver, for plaintiff in error.
W. L Boatright, Atty. Gen., and Charles H. Haines, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.
The state board of medical examiners has been created by our General Assembly as an administrative body, and invested with power to protect the public health and to control and regulate the practice of medicine in this state. Among its powers are the granting and revoking of licenses to practice medicine in this state. A license that has been granted may be revoked if the holder is guilty of immoral, unprofessional, or dishonorable conduct. No one may lawfully practice medicine in this state without a license from the board or continue to practice after his license has been revoked.
A verified complaint was filed with our state board by Mrs. A. K. Squier, charging that Dr. J. E. Doran, to whom a license had been granted by the board to practice his profession in this state, had been guilty of immoral, unprofessional, and dishonorable conduct therein. The testimony of Mrs. Squier and others was taken in support of the charge, and the doctor was present in person and by counsel, and he testified as a witness. The board determined that the charges were established, and revoked his license. Thereupon Doran filed his petition in the Denver district court for a writ of certiorari, and the same was granted, for a judicial review of the record of the board. Upon the record thus certified, the district court refused to interfere with the findings and decision of the board, and dismissed the writ, to review which Doran is prosecuting this writ of error.
The specific charge is that the doctor had caused an advertisement to be published in a newspaper in Haxtun, Colo., containing, among other things, a statement that he had professionally treated and cured Mrs. Squier of ulcers of the stomach, which statements were false and untrue, and known to be so by the doctor at the time the advertisement was published, and were made for the purpose of misleading and deceiving the people who might read the same, and with a view of obtaining patients and fees for himself. Mrs. Squier testified that she had never been a patient of Doran; had never authorized or permitted him to make use of her name as was done in this publication or to reveal her alleged physical condition; that he had never treated her for, or cured her of, ulcers, or any other ailment or disease.
That Dr. Doran caused such advertisement to be published was admitted by him on the stand, and he also admitted that he had not treated her for ulcers, but that he had given her treatment of some kind. The doctor's defense in part seems to be that, though he had not treated Mrs. Squier for the specific ailment mentioned in the publication, as the one with which she was afflicted, yet he did treat her for some other ailment, but is not to be held responsible for the publication because he did not prepare it. He testifies that he is a graduate of a medical school in Minneapolis, is a specialist in internal medicine, does not use the knife, and gives free consultation; that he received a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lucas v. District Court of Pueblo County in Tenth Judicial Dist., 18859
...Board of Medical Examiners v. Noble, 65 Colo. 410, 177 P. 141; People ex rel. Irwin v. Morley, 72 Colo. 421, 211 P. 643; Doran v. State Board, 78 Colo. 153, 240 P. 335.' There is good reason why in original proceedings in prohibition, mandamus and certiorari the court determines only the qu......
-
Coe v. U.S. Dist. Court for Dist. of Colorado, 82-1309
...consists of nine (9) physician members and two members from the public at large. C.R.S. 1973, 12-36-103. In Doran v. State Bd. of Medical Exmrs., 78 Colo. 153, 240 P. 335 (1925) the court observed that the state board of medical examiners is presumed to know better than laymen the ethics of......
-
Hickman v. Catholic Health Initiatives
...Id. at 857–58. ¶ 35 Similarly here, the health care industry has long been regulated under state law. SeeDoran v. State Bd. of Med. Exam'rs, 78 Colo. 153, 153, 240 P. 335, 335 (1925) (noting the creation of a legislatively-formed body “invested with power to protect the public health and to......
-
State Bd. of Dental Examiners v. Savelle
...8 P.2d 693 90 Colo. 177 STATE BOARD OF DENTAL EXAMINERS et al. v. SAVELLE. No. 12666.Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.January 18, ... 1090; Board of Commissioners v. Dunlap, 83 Colo ... 360, 364, 265 P. 94; State Board of Medical Examiners v ... Spears, 79 Colo. 588, 247 P. 563, 54 A.L.R. 1498; ... Doran v. State Board of ... ...
-
Rule 106 FORMS OF WRITS ABOLISHED.
...Colo. 50, 197 P. 564 (1921); Dilliard v. State Bd. of Med. Exam'rs, 69 Colo. 575, 196 P. 866 (1921); Doran v. State Bd. of Med. Exam'rs, 78 Colo. 153, 240 P. 335 (1925); State Bd. of Med. Exam'rs v. Spears, 79 Colo. 588, 247 P. 563 (1926); Bd. of Comm'rs v. Dunlap, 83 Colo. 360, 265 P. 94 (......