Commonwealth v. Basham
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 26 —INDICTMENT 1. The Dental Statutes are to be construed liberally. Black on Interp., sec. 113. 2. If tbe act of 1893 repeals, in any way, the former dental acts, fhe repeal is one by implication. Ky. Stat., sec. 459. , 3. Repeals by implication are not to he favored, and will never he allowed except upon the ground of irreconcilable repugnancy.
Read the full summary
Case 26 —INDICTMENT 1. The Dental Statutes are to be construed liberally. Black on Interp., sec. 113. 2. If tbe act of 1893 repeals, in any way, the former dental acts, fhe repeal is one by implication. Ky. Stat., sec. 459. , 3. Repeals by implication are not to he favored, and will never he allowed except upon the ground of irreconcilable repugnancy. Black on Interp., sec. 53; Courtney v. Louisville, 12 Bush, p. 424; Mayor, etc., of Cumberland v. Magruder, 34 Md., 381; Beatty v. Com., 91 Ky., 313; sec. 6 Dental Act, May 1, 1893. 4. Answer to objection that an implied repeal takes place…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE HAZELRIGG
delivered the opinion, oe the court.
The appellee was indicted for practicing dentistry without securing a certificate of qualification from the board of examiners of the Kentucky Dental Association, as required by the law of May 10, 1886.
A demurrer was sustained to the indictment, and-the Commonwealth has appealed.
The present statute on the subject — May1,1893, Kentucky Statutes, section 459 — requires only one class of persons to obtain this certificate, viz., those who desire to begin the practice of dentistry after the adoption of the law, and, as it is not alleged that the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Wilson v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1904
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Attorney General v. PollittCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1935
- Hodgen v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1911
- Burke, Etc. v. Department of RevenueCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1943
- Commonwealth v. CraigCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1911