Legal Opinion

Brown v. University of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 6, 1934Published

1Dissent

Rhodes, J. (dissenting).

The fundamental question here presented is whether rule 8, governing dental advertising, promulgated by the Board of Regents, is a valid exercise of power conferred.

It is argued that the Legislature did not intend that all advertising should be prohibited, because by section 1311 of the Education Law it has enacted certain rules for the violation of which the license and registration of a practitioner of dentistry may be revoked. A portion of that section authorizes such revocation where it appears that the dentist is guilty of untrue, fraudulent or misleading…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. New York Ex Rel. Silz v. HesterbergSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  2. Matter of Dr. Bloom Dentist, Inc. v. CruiseNew York Court of Appeals · 1932
  3. Dieterich v. . FargoNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
  4. In re O'NeilAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API