Maryland Naturopathic Ass'n, Inc. v. Kloman

Decision Date09 December 1948
Docket Number33.
PartiesMARYLAND NATUROPATHIC ASS'N, Inc. v. KLOMAN et al.
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

Appeal from Circuit Court No. 2 of Baltimore City; Joseph Sherbow Judge.

Suit in equity by Maryland Naturopathic Association, Inc., a body corporate, against E. H. Kloman, M.D., and others constituting the Board of Medical Examiners for the State of Maryland, for an injunction and a decree declaring that the system of healing known as naturopathy is not included in the practice of medicine as regulated by the State Medical Practice Act. From a decree sustaining defendants' demurrer and dismissing bill, complainant appeals.

Decree affirmed.

Maurice Braverman, of Baltimore, for appellant.

Hall Hammond, Atty. Gen. (J. Edgar Harvey, Deputy Atty. Gen., on the brief), for appellees.

Before DELAPLAINE, COLLINS, HENDERSON and MARKELL, JJ.

DELAPLAINE Judge.

This suit in equity was brought by Maryland Naturopathic Association, Inc., against Dr. E. H. Kloman and seven other physicians constituting the Maryland State Board of Medical Examiners to obtain an injunction and a declaratory decree declaring that the system of healing known as naturopathy is not included in the practice of medicine as regulated by the State Medical Practice Act. Code 1939, Code Supp.1947 art. 43, §§ 116-144.

Naturopathy, according to the bill of complaint, is a system of healing which does not use drugs or surgery to cure disease, but instead makes use of the healing properties of such natural agencies as air, sunshine, water, light, heat, electricity, exercise, rest, massage, health foods, vitamins, minerals, special food preparations, herbs, external applications, baths, sweats, and irrigations, in conjunction with the application of the scientific principles of mental hygiene, health education, physical culture, manipulation, corrective gymnastics, dietetics, hygiene and sanitation.

The bill alleges that defendants are required by law to license qualified persons to practice medicine and surgery in this State, and one of the defendants, Dr. Lewis P. Grundy, secretary of the State Board of Medical Examiners, is charged with the duty to inquire into all violations of the Medical Practice Act and to institute all proceedings or prosecutions for the unlawful practice of medicine or surgery; that the Attorney General of Maryland has rendered an opinion that naturopathy is not recognized by the laws of this State and that any persons attempting to practice it are violating the law; and that the members of the Board of Medical Examiners are preparing to prosecute naturopathic physicians for unlawful practice of medicine.

The bill prays for the following relief: (1) that defendants be enjoined from interfering with the right of naturopathic physicians to practice their profession; (2) that defendants be enjoined from instituting any criminal proceedings against naturopathic physicians charging unlawful practice of medicine; (3) that the Court declare that naturopathy is a separate and distinct branch of the healing arts and sciences and not included in the practice of medicine; and (4) that the Court declare that naturopathic physicians be allowed to use the title of 'naturopathic physician.' From a decree of the chancellor sustaining a demurrer filed by defendants and dismissing the bill, complainant brought this appeal.

The Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act expressly provides that any person whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a statute may have determined any question of construction or validity arising under the statute, and obtain a declaration of rights, status or other legal relations thereunder. Laws of 1939, ch. 294; Laws of 1945, ch. 724; Code Supp.1947, art. 31A, sec. 2. We are confronted at the outset with the question whether the Naturopathic Association has any rights, status or other legal relations affected by the statute. The Association alleges that it is incorporated under the laws of the State of Maryland for the protection and encouragement of the interests of naturopaths, and that the members of the Association are engaged in the practice of naturopathy. It is an elementary rule that in order to entitle a party to maintain a bill in equity, he must show...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Kolper Props., Inc. v. Birroteca Mgmt., LLC, 586
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • June 10, 2019
    ...personam." Gardner v. Board of County Comm'rs of St. Mary's County, 320 Md. 63, 76 (1990) (quoting Maryland Naturopathic Ass'n v. Kloman, 191 Md. 626, 631 (1948)). 11. The Kolper Parties assert in a footnote that although they do not agree that negligent misrepresentation applies to the rel......
  • Rodblatt v. Fox
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • December 9, 1948

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT