York v. State ex rel. Schwaid
| Decision Date | 11 January 1943 |
| Citation | 152 Fla. 285,10 So.2d 813 |
| Parties | YORK et al., State Board of Dental Examiners, v. STATE ex rel. SCHWAID. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied Feb. 1, 1943.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Duval County; DeWitt T. Gray judge.
Charles Cook Howell and Charles Cook Howell, Jr., both of Jacksonville, Morehead & Palot, of Miami, and J. Tom Watson, Atty. Gen., for appellants.
Whitaker Brothers, of Tampa, for appellee.
This is a mandamus proceeding in which appellee seeks to require appellants as members of the State Board of Dental Examiners to issue him a certificate to practice dentistry in the State of Florida as the result of an examination taken for that purpose. The appeal is from a final judgment awarding a peremptory writ of mandamus.
Appellant contends that this judgment should be reversed because (1) the State Board of Dental Examiners is authorized to require that all applicants to practice dentistry pass a theoretical and a practical examination and that such an examination was given appellee; (2) the evidence shows that appellee failed to pass said examination, and (3) since appellee failed to pass said examination, it was error to require the production of the examination papers of other applicants who took the examination at the same time.
In his petition for alternative writ of mandamus, appellee grounded his claim to a certificate on the allegation that he was qualified to practice dentistry in the State of Florida, that he took the examination and made a passing grade and as high a grade as other applicants who took the same examination and were passed and that he was deliberately 'flunked' on account of prejudice and caprice of appellants.
Such was the issue on which the case was tried and the court below found that appellee was in every way qualified to practice dentistry in the State of Florida, that he did in fact make a passing mark on his examination, that he is entitled to have a certificate issued to him, that appellants did capriciously and arbitrarily 'flunk' appellee and that they illegally capriciously, and arbitrarily refused to issue him a certificate.
Under the power given them to promulgate rules and regulations appellants were authorized to prescribe a standard of moral and educational qualifications for those who take the examination to practice dentistry. They may also prescribe that the examination be part theoretical and part practical and what constitutes a passing grade in each branch but when an applicant has shown that his moral and educational qualifications measure up to the standard and he has been admitted to the examination, the appellants are then bound to accord him fair treatment and give him an honest grade. They are not permitted to promulgate regulations as to any of these matters and conceal them from the applicant.
There is no question about the moral and educational qualification of the applicant in this case. He is shown to be a man of high moral and professional integrity, an honor graduate from one of the most reputable dental colleges in the country, has practiced dentistry since 1917 in the State of New York, having enjoyed a splendid clientele. These things do nothing more than buttress his moral character since we have no reciprocity...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Marmer v. Board of Registration of Chiropractors
...sample of the answers by other examinees. See Cupples v. Marzall, 101 F.Supp. 579, 582--583 (D.D.C.1952); York v. State ex rel. Schwaid, 152 Fla. 285, 10 So.2d 813 (1943). In the circumstances, the plaintiffs' counsel was not placed at a disadvantage by the board's insistence that he presen......
-
Sanitarians' Registration Board v. Soloman, C-491
...142 So.2d 301 ... SANITARIANS' REGISTRATION BOARD of the State of Florida, and Lyman A. Scribner, James N. Messer, J. W. Kirkland, C. E ... State ex rel. Trustee Realty Co. v. Atkinson, 97 Fla. 1032, 122 So. 794 (1929); Gamble ... For instance, in York v. State ex rel ... Schwaid, 152 Fla. 285, 10 So.2d 813 (1943), the ... ...
-
Marmer v. Board of Registration of Chiropractors
... ... A State cannot exclude a person from the practice of an occupation in a manner or ... See York, Chairman, Florida State Bd. of Dental Examrs. v. State ex rel. Schwaid, ... ...
-
Gulfstream Park Racing Ass'n, Inc. v. Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, Dept. of Business Regulation
...support the denial of Gulfstream's application because administrative rules will not be applied retroactively. York v. State ex rel. Schwaid, 152 Fla. 285, 10 So.2d 813 (1943); Sexton Cove Estates, Inc. v. State Pollution Control Board, 325 So.2d 468 (Fla. 1st DCA After the date of the fina......