State v. Loesch
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtDeNNy, J.
The bill of indictment follows the language of the statute and is sufficient in form to charge a violation of the provisions of G.S. 90-18. In fact, its sufficiency is not challenged except upon the ground that it fails to disclose that the Board of Medical Examiners of the State of North Carolina complained to the Attorney-General about the conduct of the defendant; that the Attorney-General conducted an investigation and directed the Solicitor to institute an action against the defendant.
The defendant contends that a strict compliance with the procedure outlined in G.S. 90-21, is a…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- State v. . BealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- State v. . DavenportSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
- State v. BealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- State v. . JacksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- State v. . GregorySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- State v. GreerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- State v. HammondsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- State v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- State v. CamachoSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
- State v. TateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.