Judges: THOMAS, J.
Attorneys: James N. Daniel, for Petitioner;
Dickenson Dickenson, and Walter F. Rogers, for Respondents.
Filed: Jul. 18, 1939
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: The sole question involved here is the constitutionality of Chapter 16972 of the Acts of 1935 which attempted to amend Chapter 14708 of the Laws of 1931. *Page 302 The latter law was a comprehensive legislative enactment to regulate the practice of dentistry in Florida and among its provisions were the requisite qualifications of those who should be given permission to engage in the profession and the manner of appointment of a board to determine the fitness of the applicants. The members of thi
Summary: The sole question involved here is the constitutionality of Chapter 16972 of the Acts of 1935 which attempted to amend Chapter 14708 of the Laws of 1931. *Page 302 The latter law was a comprehensive legislative enactment to regulate the practice of dentistry in Florida and among its provisions were the requisite qualifications of those who should be given permission to engage in the profession and the manner of appointment of a board to determine the fitness of the applicants. The members of this..
More
I think Chapter 16972, Acts of 1935, is a valid local law as applied to Okeechobee County where intention of such enactment was advertised, as shown by the legislative journals.
I do not think the Act as a local or special Act offends against the provisions of Section 20, Article III of the State Constitution. See Lainhart v. Catts, 73 Fla. 735, 75 So. 47; State v. Fearnside, 87 Fla. 349, 100 So. 256; State v. Wheat,103 Fla. 1, 137 So. 277; Masters v. Duval County, 114 Fla. 205, 154 So. 172; State v. Hand, 96 Fla. 799, 119 So. 370; Jackson Lbr. Co. v. Walton County, 95 Fla. 632, 116 So. 771; Carlton v. Constitution Indemnity Co., 117 Fla. 143, 157 So. 431; State v. Holbrook, 129 Fla. 241, 176 So. 99; State v. Garrett, 130 Fla. 413, 178 So. 309.
The provisions contained in Chapter 16972, supra, would have been valid, had they been originally written in Chapter 14708, Acts of 1931, and, therefore, I consider the attempted amendment of that Act by Chapter, 16972 valid.
WHITFIELD, J., concurs.
