State v. Sawyer
| Decision Date | 31 March 1923 |
| Citation | 214 P. 222,36 Idaho 814 |
| Parties | STATE, Respondent, v. H. W. SAWYER, Appellant |
| Court | Idaho Supreme Court |
PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS-OSTEOPATHY-PRACTICE OF MEDICINE AND SURGERY-STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.
Under the laws of this state, the holder of a license to practice osteopathy is not authorized to practice medicine and surgery, or either of them.
APPEAL from the District Court of the Eleventh Judicial District for Twin Falls County. Hon. W. A. Babcock, Judge.
Conviction for practicing medicine and surgery without a license. Affirmed.
Affirmed.
E. V Larson, E. M. Wolfe and J. F. Martin, for Appellant.
The laws of the state of Idaho regulating the practice of medicine and surgery authorize an osteopath to use such methods as are recognized by the osteopathic profession, even though these methods are also recognized as a proper treatment by other schools. (C. S., secs. 2105, 2108, 2109 2112, 2137, 2138, 2140, 2141, 2152, and chaps. 91, 94, 95, 96 and 97; State v. Fite, 29 Idaho 463, 159 P. 1183.)
An osteopathic physician should use any method in treating a disease which is recognized as a proper method by osteopathic physicians in good standing at that time and place. (State v. Smith, 25 Idaho 541, 138 P. 1107.)
Roy L. Black, Attorney General, and Dean Driscoll and James L. Boone, Assistants, for Respondent.
Osteopathy defined. (C. S., sec. 9455; The New Standard Dictionary; Black's Law Dictionary; Words and Phrases.)
Osteopathy is not included within the meaning of the statute regulating the practice of medicine and surgery. (State v. Fite, 29 Idaho 463, 159 P. 1183.)
Osteopathy must be given the meaning that term had at the time of the enactment of Idaho's Osteopathic Act in 1907. (State v. Bonham, 93 Wash. 489, 161 P. 377; State v. Fite, supra.)
A license to practice osteopathy does not authorize the practice of medicine and surgery, or either. (State v. Bonham, supra; Ex parte Rust, 181 Cal. 73, 183 P. 548; State v. Rust, 119 Wash. 480, 206 P. 33.)
--Appellant was convicted of practicing medicine and surgery without a license, with the intent of receiving compensation therefor. The operation performed consisted of making an incision into the abdomen of a human being and removing the appendix. It was shown that appellant did not have a license authorizing him to practice medicine and surgery, but held a license authorizing him to practice osteopathy.
That the legislature has power to prescribe the qualifications for those engaged in the practice of medicine and surgery, or either, and to prohibit or penalize such practice by one not possessing such license, is not open to doubt. (State v. Johnson, 84 Kan. 411, 114 P. 390, 41 L. R. A., N. S., 539; State v. Bragg, 134 Ala. 165, 32 So. 767, 58 L. R. A. 925.)
In 1899, the legislature of this state enacted a law regulating the practice of medicine and surgery. This law was substantially the same as Title 16, Chap. 90, of the Compiled Statutes. By C. S., sec. 2105, it is provided that every person, except as otherwise provided by law, desiring to commence the practice of medicine and surgery, or either of them, within the state shall show certain educational qualifications and submit to an examination. C. S., sec. 2112, contains the definition of the practice of medicine and surgery, or either. The statute also makes it a misdemeanor for one to practice medicine and surgery who has not obtained the requisite license.
In 1907, the legislature passed an act regulating the practice of osteopathy which is now chapter 92 of the same title in the Compiled Statutes. This statute provides that a successful applicant shall receive "a certificate granting him or her the right to practice osteopathy in the state of Idaho." Unless, therefore, the term "osteopathy" is broad enough to comprehend surgery, or in other words, unless the practice of osteopathy includes the practice of surgery, the statutory prohibition of the practice of medicine and surgery, except by one who has obtained the license to practice medicine and surgery as prescribed by chapter 90, still prevails.
The New Standard Dictionary of the English language defines osteopathy as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Armstrong
... ... H ... Conner, Atty. General, and Jas. L. Boone, Assistant, for ... Respondent ... Under ... the stipulated facts in this case the appellant is engaged in ... the practice of medicine and surgery. (C. S., sec. 2112; ... State v. Fite, 29 Idaho 463, 159 P. 1183; State ... v. Sawyer, 36 Idaho 814, 24 P. 222; State v ... Herring, 70 N.J.L. 34, 1 Ann. Cas. 51, 56 A. 670; ... State v. Liffring, 61 Ohio 39, 76 Am. St. 358, 55 ... N.E. 168, 46 L. R. A. 334; Hayden v. State, 81 Miss ... 291, 95 Am. St. 471, 33 So. 653; State v. Gallagher, ... 101 Ark. 593, 143 S.W. 98, 38 L ... ...
-
State v. Baker
... ... 2; 46 C.J. 1142; 86 A.L.R ... 626-630; Burke v. Kansas State Osteopathic ... Ass'n. 10 Cir., 111 F.2d 250; Waldo v. Poe, ... D.C., 14 F.2d 749; In re Rust, 181 Cal. 73, 183 ... P. 548; Mabry v. State Board of Examiners in Optometry, 190 ... Ga. 751, 10 S.E.2d 740; State v. Sawyer, 36 Idaho ... 814, 214 P. 222; State v. Stoddard, 215 Iowa 534, ... 245 N.W. 273, 86 A.L.R. 616; State ex rel. Wheat v ... Moore, 154 Kan. 193, 117 P.2d 598: State v ... Johnson, 84 Kan. 411, 114 P. 390, 41 L.R.A.,N.S., 539; ... State v. Hopkins, 54 Mont. 52, 166 P. 304, ... Ann.Cas.1918D, ... ...
-
Graham v. Equity Nat. Life Ins. Co.
...Ex parte Rust, 181 Cal. 73, 183 P. 548, 550, nor, at least under some statutes, the practice of medicine or surgery. State v. Sawyer, 36 Idaho 814, 214 P. 222.' Here, the diagnosis of the several medical doctors is that the insured died of lung cancer. They do not have to be Pathologists in......
-
Smith v. State Bd. of Medicine of Idaho
...found by the learned trial court, practicing medicine and surgery without a license; therefore, he was violating the law. State v. Sawyer, 36 Idaho 814, 214 P. 222; People v. Fowler, 32 Cal.App.2d Supp. 737, 84 P.2d 326; Millsap v. Alderson, 63 Cal.App. 518, 219 P. 469; Cooper v. Board of M......