Legal Opinion
Kuhl v. Ark. State Board of Chiropractic Examiners
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Decided February 4, 1963No. 5-2874PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Sam Robinson, Associate Justice.
The appellants, William E. and Robert J. Kuhl, are chiropractors authorized to practice in the State of Arkansas. On the 8th day of November, 1960, the Arkansas State Medical Board filed a complaint in the Pulaski Chancery Court, wherein it was alleged that the above named appellants were engaged in the illegal practice of medicine in this state. The complaint alleged that the appellants were doing about a dozen different things that constituted the practice of medicine.1
On the 5th day of June, 1961, the Arkansas State Board of Chiropractic Examiners, acting on…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States Ex Rel. Bilokumsky v. TodSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Bockman v. Ark. State Medical BoardSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1958
- Miller v. ReedSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1962
3Cited by7 opinions
- Marrow v. State Farm InsuranceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1978
- C.C.B. v. Arkansas Department of Health & Human ServicesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2007
- Hake v. Ark. State Medical BoardSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1964
- Piggott State Bank v. State Banking BoardSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1967
- United States v. Article of Device Consisting of 2 Devices, More or Less, Labeled in Part: "Lindquist Chronosonic Ultrasound Model 401B Serial 9845 (or 9846)"District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1966
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.