State v. Hollingsworth

• Decision Date: 09 December 1931
• Citation: 103 Fla. 801,138 So. 372
• Parties: STATE et rel. TULLIDGE v. HOLLINGSWORTH et al.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

138 So. 372

103 Fla. 801

STATE et rel. TULLIDGE v. HOLLINGSWORTH et al.

Florida Supreme Court

December 9, 1931

En Banc.

Original proceeding in mandamus by the State, on the relation of Edwin K. Tullidge, against S. G. Hollingsworth and others constituting the State Board of Medical Examiners of Florida. On respondent's motion to quash the alternative writ.

Motion overruled.

COUNSEL Wallace F. Perry, of Miami, for relator.

Waller & Pepper, of Tallahassee, for respondents.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Alternative writ of mandamus was granted by this court, directed to the state board of medical examiners, commanding them to restore the name of relator, Edwin K. Tullidge, to the roll as a legally licensed doctor, physician, and surgeon in the state of Florida and to reinstate his license as such and set aside and vacate the order heretofore made by them revoking the license of said Edwin K. Tullidge. A motion to quash the alternative writ was seasonably entered.

The motion to quash invokes the provisions of section 13 (section 5), chapter 12285, Acts of 1927, being section 3415, Compiled General Laws of Florida 1927, as a bar to relief on behalf of relator; it being contended that said act provides a complete and adequate remedy peculiar to causes of this kind.

Section 3415, Compiled General Laws of Florida 1927, provides for revoking, suspending, or annulling the license of practitioners of medicine in this state. After enumerating the grounds for such revocation or suspension, the statute defines the procedure to be followed in these terms:

'Proceedings for revocation of a license or the annulment of registration shall be begun by filing written charge or charges against the accused. These charges may be preferred by any person or corporation or the board may, on its own motion, direct the executive officer of said board to prefer said charges. Said charges shall be filed with the secretary- treasurer of said board; upon the filing of said charges as herein provided, a time and place for the hearing of said charges shall be fixed by said board as soon as convenient and a copy of the charges, together with a notice of the time and place when they will be heard and determined shall be served upon the accused at least ten days before the date actually fixed for said hearing. At said hearing the accused shall have the right to cross-examine the witnesses against him, and to produce witnesses in his defense, and to appear personally or by counsel. Said board may, upon satisfactory proof made that any licentiate has bee guilty of any of the charges against him, suspend such licentiate from the practice of medicine, and call in the license of said licentiate upon a two-thirds majority vote of the board: Provided, however, that such suspended physician may have the proceedings of said board reviewed by certiorari to the circuit court of the circuit in which said license is recorded.'

The statute further provides that the accused may have a trial de novo...