Legal Opinion

Van Heukelom v. Nevada State Board Chiropractic Examiners

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided November 30, 1950No. 3616PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By the Court,

Badt, J.:

This is an original petition for a writ of prohibition prohibiting the respondent board from proceeding with a hearing looking toward the revocation of petitioner’s license to practice chiropractic. The proceedings were initiated by the respondent board against petitioner under the provisions of sec. 1090, N.C.L.1929, which reads as follows:

“Upon complaint of the board, after twenty days notice of time and place of trial has been given to any licensee, if it shall be found that he practices anything other than chiropractic to cure or relieve disease or to remove…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. In Re ScottNevada Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Bell v. First Judicial District CourtNevada Supreme Court · 1905
  3. Matter of Tompkins v. Board of RegentsNew York Court of Appeals · 1949
  4. Mississippi State Board of Dental Examinees v. MandellMississippi Supreme Court · 1945
  5. Haviland v. FoleyNevada Supreme Court · 1935

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Urban Renewal Agency of City of Reno v. IacomettiNevada Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Stockmeier v. Nevada Department of Corrections Psychological Review PanelNevada Supreme Court · 2006
  3. State ex rel. Richardson v. Board of RegentsNevada Supreme Court · 1953
  4. State Ex Rel. Kassabian v. Board of Medical Examiners of NevadaNevada Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Matter of KenickNevada Supreme Court · 1984

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API