Jacoby v. South Carolina State Bd. of Naturopathic Examiners
Decision Date | 15 March 1951 |
Docket Number | No. 16477,16477 |
Citation | 64 S.E.2d 138,219 S.C. 66 |
Parties | JACOBY v. SOUTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF NATUROPATHIC EXAMINERS. |
Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
C. T. Graydon, John Grimball, Columbia, for appellant.
Norbert A. Theodore, Columbia, for respondent.
The appellant, Myron D. Jacoby, was admitted to the practice of naturopathy in South Carolina on July 15, 1944, after taking an examination required by the South Carolina State Board of Naturopathic Examiners, and continued in active practice until December 1, 1948, when he was served with a rule to show cause why his license to practice naturopathy should not be revoked. After several hearings were held pursuant to this rule, the Board issued its order September 22, 1949, revoking appellant's license to practice in this state.
On November 4, 1949, the Honorable G. Duncan Bellinger issued a rule to show cause in the nature of a writ of certiorari and a writ of supersedeas. The matter was heard before the Honorable T. B. Greneker, presiding Judge of the Fifth Judicial Circuit, who issued his order on April 11, 1950, affirming the action of the Board, and the matter now comes before this Court on appeal from this order, the exceptions to which present five questions as listed by appellant:
I. Should the action of the Board of Naturopathic Examiners, in revoking appellant's license to practice, be reversed because based upon illegal, incompetent, unlawful, and hearsay evidence?
II. Does the record show such bias and prejudice against the appellant on the part of the Board of Naturopathic Examiners as to require a reversal of its action in revoking appellant's license to practice?
III. Were not these matters and facts, with which the appellant was charged, previously passed upon by the Board of Naturopathic Examiners so as to make the questions and issues raised thereby res judicata?
IV. Did the Board of Naturopathic Examiners have the power to revoke appellant's license to practice?
V. Was there any evidence in the entire record to support, the revocation of appellant's license to practice?
Before considering the facts of this case, it might be well to set out the pertinent parts of the several Acts of the General Assembly relating to the practice of naturopathy in South Carolina which are found in the acts of 1937, Act May 10, 40 Statutes, p. 441, the acts of 1941, Act April 18, 42 Statutes, p. 143, and the acts of 1949, Act June 7, 46 Statutes, p. 538, which are as follows:
's 2. License--issuance.--Any person of good moral character who has been continuously engaged in the practice of Naturopathy in the State of South Carolina for one (1) year prior to passage of this Act, but must be a graduate of a reputable school of Naturopathy, shall be licensed without an examination, upon payment of ten ($10.00) dollars, if he applies for a license within twenty (20) days after the organization of the Board, but hereafter all applicants must be graduates of a reputable college or school of Naturopathy and must stand examination before this Board.
's 4. Non-residents.--Any person of good moral character licensed by a Naturopathic Board of any other state whose requirements are commensurate with the requirements of this Board, upon the payment of twenty ($20.00) dollars shall be granted a license to practice in this State.
's 7. Penalty.--Any person violating any of the provisions of this Act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and punishable in the discretion of the Court.
'Approved the 10th day of May, 1937'.
'Section 3: Non-residents.--Any person of good moral character licensed by a Naturopathic Board of any other State whose requirements are commensurate with the requirements of said Board upon the payment of Fifty ($50.00) Dollars shall be granted a license to practice in this State without any furthr examination.
'Section 4: Practice of naturopathy defined.--The use and practice of phytotherapy, minor surgery, obstetrics, and gynecology, autotherapy and biologicals shall be made a part of and be included in the practice of Naturopathy.
'Section 5: Recognized school, college or university of naturopathy defined.--Any school, college or university legally chartered and having a regular professional course in Naturopathy and its allies branches of four years of nine months each, and includes in its curriculum the following subjects: Bacteriology, Anatomy, Diagnosis, Comparative Medicine, Physiology, Etiology, Hydrotherapy, Histology Pathology, Phytotherapy, Biology, Toxicology, Electrotherapy, Chemistry, Hygiene and Sanitation, Massotherapy, Analysis, Biochemistry, Orthopedics, Symtomatology, Physiotherapy, Practice of Naturopathy, Autotherapy, Ethics and Jurisprudence, Dietetics, Gynecology and Obstetrics shall be recognized by the South Carolina State Board of Naturopathic Examiners and the above requirements shall constitute the definition of a recognized school, college, university of Naturopathy.
'Section 6: Certificates sign--diseases report.--All Naturopathic physicians who are in active practice and licensed in this State shall have the authority to sign birth, death and health certificates and shall be required to report all infections and contagious diseases to the State Board of Health and shall be accorded the use of the State Biological and Chemical Laboratories.
'Section 7: Register.--All licensed Naturopathic physicians shall be required after receiving a certificate of qualification or license from the South Carolina State Board of Naturopathy Examiners to register in the County in which he or she resides with the Clerk of Court's office and pay a fee of fifty cents.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Mounts v. Chafin
...295 N.Y. 754, 65 N.E.2d 570 (1946); Williams v. Dickey, 204 Okla. 629, 232 P.2d 637 (1951); Jacoby v. South Carolina State Bd. of Naturopathic Examiners, 219 S.C. 66, 64 S.E.2d 138 (1951). See generally Annot., 165 A.L.R. 1138 Of particular interest to us is In re Berman, 245 N.C. 612, 97 S......
-
City of Columbia v. South Carolina Public Service Commission
...201 S.C. 237, 22 S.E.2d 685; Feldman v. South Carolina Tax Commission, 203 S.C. 49, 26 S.E.2d 22; Jacoby v. South Carolina State Board of Naturopathic Examiners, 219 S.C. 66, 64 S.E.2d 138. The writ of certiorari can be issued only by a judge acting within his jurisdiction and unless the au......
-
Board of Bank Control v. Thomason
...a license to partice Naturopathy will not be set aside unless wholly unsupported by the evidence, Jacoby v. South Carolina State Board of Naturopathic Examiners, 219 S.C. 66, 64 S.E.2d 138; and that the action of a Review Committee in making a tobacco acreage allotment under the Agricultura......
-
Richards v. City of Columbia, 17032
...an administrative or quasi-judicial body is not governed by the ordinary legal rules of evidence. Jacoby v. South Carolina State Board of Naturopathic Examiners, 219 S.C. 66, 64 S.E.2d 138. However, as said in 42 Am.Jur. 652, Public Administrative Law, Sec. 'Most authorities agree that ther......