Maryland case law › Maryland Naturopathic Ass'n v. Kloman

Maryland Naturopathic Ass'n v. Kloman

191 Md. 626 (1948) · Court of Appeals of Maryland
Court of Appeals of MarylandDisposition: AffirmedDelaplaine, J.✓ Good law
HoldingThe Maryland Naturopathic Association, Inc., a corporation formed to protect naturopaths, sued the Maryland State Board of Medical Examiners and its members in equity, seeking an injunction against prosecution and a declaratory decree that naturopathy is not the practice of…

Delaplaine, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This suit in equity was brought by Maryland Naturopathic Association, Inc., against Dr. E. H. Kloman and seven other physicians constituting the Maryland State Board of Medical Examiners to obtain an injunction and a declaratory decree declaring that the system of healing known as naturopathy is not included in the practice of medicine as regulated by the State Medical Practice Act. Code 1939, Code Supp.1947, art. 43, §§ 116-144. Naturopathy, according to the bill of complaint, is a system of healing which does not use drugs or surgery to 629 cure disease, but instead makes use of the healing properties of such natural agencies as air, sunshine, water, light, heat, electricity, exercise, rest, massage, health foods, vitamins, minerals, special food preparations, herbs, external applications, baths, sweats, and irrigations, in conjunction with the application of the scientific principles of mental hygiene, health education, physical culture, maniplation, corrective gymnastics, dietetics, hygiene and sanitation.

The bill alleges that defendants are required by law to license qualified persons to practice medicine and surgery in this State, and one of the defendants, Dr. Lewis P. Gundry, secretary of the State Board of Medical Examiners, is charged with the duty to inquire into all violations of the Medical Practice Act and to institute all proceedings or prosecutions for the unlawful practice of medicine or surgery; that the Attorney General of Maryland has rendered an opinion that naturopathy is not recognized by the laws of this State and that any persons attempting to practice it are violating the law; and that the members of the Board of Medical Examiners are preparing to prosecute naturopathic physicians for unlawful practice of medicine. The bill prays for the following relief: (1) that defendants be enjoined from interfering with the right of naturopathic physicians to practice their profession; (2) that defendants be enjoined from instituting any criminal proceedings against naturopathic physicians charging unlawful practice of medicine; (3) that the Court declare that naturopathy is a separate and distinct branch of the healing arts and sciences and not included in the practice of medicine; and (4) that the Court declare that naturopathic physicians be allowed to use the title of “naturopathic physician.” From a decree of the chancellor sustaining a demurrer filed by defendants and dismissing the bill, complainant brought this appeal. The Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act expressly provides that any person whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a statute may have deter 630 mined any question of construction or validity arising under the statute, and obtain a declaration of rights, status or other legal relations thereunder. Laws of 1939, ch. 294; Laws of 1945, ch. 724; Code Supp. 1947, art. 31A sec. 2.

We are confronted at the outset with the question whether the Naturopathic Association has any rights, status or other legal relations affected by the statute. The Association alleges that it is incorporated under the laws of the State of Maryland for the protection and encouragement of the interests of naturopaths, and that the members of the Association are engaged in the practice of naturopathy. It is an elementary rule that in order to entitle a party to maintain a bill in equity, he must show an interest in the subject matter of the suit or a right to the thing demanded. If the interest or right is not shown on the face of the

This is a preview of Maryland Naturopathic Ass'n v. Kloman. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.