Legal Opinion

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Arizona Board of Chiropractic Examiners

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided June 18, 1996No. 2 CA-CV 96-0164PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

LIVERMORE, Judge.

Osteopaths and chiropractors are permitted to engage in physical therapy as part of their practice. We are asked to decide in this ease whether their assistants may be permitted to administer such therapy. The rules of defendants, the A-izona Board of Chiropractic Examiners and the Arizona Board of Osteopathic Examiners, permit this activity. Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company brought this declaratory judgment action seeking to hold the rules invalid as beyond the authority of the boards to adopt. It appeals from an adverse summary judgment. We…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. SweetArizona Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Matter of Promulgation of Njac 13: 35-6.14New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1985
  3. Sanfilippo v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1975

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Webb Ex Rel. Webb v. Clark County SchoolNevada Supreme Court · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API