State ex rel. Bd. of Governors of Registered Dentists v. Rifleman, 33767

• Decision Date: 11 July 1950
• Docket Number: No. 33767,33767
• Citation: 220 P.2d 441,203 Okla. 294
• Parties: STATE ex rel. BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF REGISTERED DENTISTS v. RIFLEMAN.
• Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court

Page 441

220 P.2d 441

203 Okla. 294

STATE ex rel. BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF REGISTERED DENTISTS v. RIFLEMAN.

No. 33767.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

July 11, 1950.

Syllabus by the Court

1. The Board of Dental Examiners existing by authority of 59 O.S. 1941 § 221 et seq., has no authority to appoint an investigating committee to hear charges filed with the Board of Governors of the Registered Dentists of Oklahoma against a member of the Organization.

2. A hearing conducted by such a committee is without authority of law and a nullity.

3. Before a member of the Registered Dentists of Oklahoma may be disciplined by the Board of Governors of said Organization the member must be charged, notified and given a hearing as provided by the State Dental Act.

Wheeler & Wheeler, of Tulsa, Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Fred Hansen, First Asst. Atty. Gen., for plaintiff.

S. J. Clendinning, of Tulsa, for defendant.

ARNOLD, Vice Chief Justice.

By this proceeding this Court is asked to review the record of certain proceedings by the Board of Governors of the Registered Dentists of Oklahoma which resulted in the suspension of the license of defendant to practice dentistry. 59 O.S. 1941, § 279.

On July 1, 1948, there was filed before the Board of Governors a complaint charging Dr. C. E. Rifleman with infractions of certain provisions of the Dentistry Act. On July 6, 1948, Dr. Rifleman received written notice by registered mail that a committee appointed by the Board of Governors would conduct a hearing on July 15, 1948, in the city of Tulsa upon the complaint so filed, said notice being signed 'John Wheeler, Jr., Secretary.' Wheeler is a member of the Bar Association but is not a member of the Organization. Dr. N. Dea Griffith, D. D. S., was at the time the Secretary of the Organization and of the Board of Governors. Pursuant to said notice the defendant appeared in person and by attorney at the time and place fixed for said hearing and filed the following special appearance and challenge to the jurisdiction of the committee to proceed: 'Comes Now the defendant and appears specially and objects to the jurisdiction of this Committee and the jurisdiction of the Board appointing this Committee, upon the ground and for the reason that the Committee is not a legally appointed Committee, nor those appointed are not legally appointed, constituted and acting members under the Statutes of the State of Oklahoma.' This special appearance and challenge to the jurisdiction was overruled and exceptions reserved.

Thereafter the hearing was conducted by the committee and at its conclusion it made written findings and recommendations which were duly filed with the Board of Governors. Based upon those findings and recommendations by the committee the Board of Governors entered an order suspending the license of the defendant for a period of 60 days on each of two charges, said suspensions to run concurrently.

Upon the filing of defendant's petition for review the Clerk of this Court notified the Board of Governors thereof as required by § 279, idem, and the Board of Governors filed in this Court a full and complete transcript of all proceedings had in said cause. In his petition for review the first ground of complaint reads: 'That the Committee, supposedly appointed by the Board of Governors of the Registered Dentists of the State of Oklahoma was not a duly and legally constituted Committee and, as such, was without legal and statutory authority to conduct said hearing.'

At the time the challenge to the appointment and jurisdiction of the committee was made and overruled there was no record available to show the appointment and jurisdiction of the Committee but it was stipulated and agreed that this essential record might be furnished to the defendant and attached to the transcript when filed in this Court for review. This was done and the purported authority of the Committee as then constituted to act in the premises is before this Court for consideration in its review and determination of this appeal.

The record so furnished to the defendant and attached to the transcript on this appeal is a brief paragraph from the minute book of the Oklahoma Board of Dental Examiners and reads as follows:

'Copied from page 157 of the minute book of the Oklahoma Board of Dental Examiners.

'Dr. Kutch moved that Mr. Wheeler, Dr. Bowyer and Dr. Oliver be appointed as a fact-finding committee in the Tulsa district to investigate the alleged violation of the Dental Act in that district. Seconded by Dr. Cole. Motion carried.'

This is followed by the words 'This is a true copy' and is signed by N. Dea Griffith, D. D. S., Secretary-Treasurer.

This necessitates an examination of the pertinent provisions of the Dentistry Act which show the authority, if any, of the Board of Dental Examiners to appoint this Committee and to delegate to it any of the powers of the Board of Governors. The State Dental Act is contained in 59 O.S. 1941, Chap. 7, § 221 et seq.

Section 222 defines the term 'Organization' to mean 'The Registered Dentists of Oklahoma' and the term 'Board' to mean 'The Board of Governors of the Registered Dentists of Oklahoma'. Section 232 declares that the members of the Organization shall be all persons now entitled to practice dentistry or dental hygiene in this State and Section 233 provides that all persons legally licensed to practice dentistry upon the effective date of this Act shall become by that fact members of the Organization. Section 234 creates a Board to be known as 'The Board of Governors of the Registered Dentists of Oklahoma' to consist of seven members. Section 236 makes the officers of the Organization a president, first vice-president, second vice-president, and secretary and treasurer and provides that the same person may hold the office of secretary and treasurer. Section 246 declares that the...