Legal Opinion

Keiningham v. Blake

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided December 9, 1919PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Urner, L,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The appellant is duly licensed and registered under the-laws of Maryland for the practice of osteopathy. In his pending petition for mandamus he claims the right to be registered with the Register of Vital Statistics of Baltimore City as a physician entitled to file certificates of births and deaths notwithstanding the provision of the statute relating to osteopathy, that nothing therein contained shall authorize any State or municipal officer “to accept from any osteopathic practitioner any birth or death certificate.” Code, Art. 43, Sec. 301. The…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Watson v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  2. Williams v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  3. People v. . ColeNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
  4. Watson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1907
  5. People ex rel. Gage v. SimanIllinois Supreme Court · 1917

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Board of Education v. WheatCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1938
  2. Pitts v. State Board of Examiners of PsychologistsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1960
  3. Aitchison v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1954
  4. McGlaughlin v. WarfieldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1941
  5. Ghingher v. PearsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API