Huls v. Arizona State Board of Osteopathic Examiners in Medicine & Surgery
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
JACOBSON, Presiding Judge.
The basic dispute raised by this appeal centers around advances made by a profession whose beginning lay primarily in the fingers and the hands of its practitioners.
Appellant, William J. Huls, is a duly licensed doctor of osteopathy. At the time of the hearing complained of in this matter, he was 78 years old and had actively practiced his profession for 47 years. On November 2, 1972, the appellee, Arizona Board of Osteopathic Examiners in Medicine and Surgery (Board) issued a complaint against Dr. Huls, charging him with unprofessional conduct as defined by…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Lentine v. State Board of HealthSupreme Court of Missouri · 1933
- Green v. BlanchardSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
- Aiton v. Board of Medical ExaminersArizona Supreme Court · 1911
- Gates v. KilcreaseArizona Supreme Court · 1947
- ARIZONA BD. OF OSTEOPATHIC EXAM. IN MED. AND SURGERY v. FerrisCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1973
3Cited by3 opinions
- Caldwell v. Arizona State Board of Dental ExaminersCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1983
- Murphy v. Board of Medical ExaminersCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1997
- Caldwell v. ARIZONA STATE BD. OF DENTAL EXAM.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1983