Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

: .
..
-. 53
‘1
. OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
.
AUSTIN
-Honorable E. R. Kott; Prosldent
.oi this department
as to vhethsr o sells custom-built
an ltapresslon taken
th3 practice of
; .The maker does not
t and his business is strict-
lined apove.
.,... _.
._ -``(Chiropodp’ means the diagnosis, medical
‘ind surgical treatmant of ailments of the human
foot: A chiropodist is ono practicing chiropody.
Whoever professes to be a chiropodist, or praotices
or assumes’the duties lnoident to chiropody, with-
. out .flrst obtaining from the Stdte Board of
.,
,
-’ &nombl% E. H. Bctt, Pmsldcnt, ti~ 2
Chimpody t$onlners 8 llcanoe r.&hor';G~ the
pnrotice OS ohlropody. shall bs lin%d not cx-
ceadin;; asi% hundred dollars, or bs confined ..-
in jail not to exceed 30 days.” -
Both of thn provlslcns quoted abow IXW dmivsd
et33 @KQter 159 at pfiZ% 357 of tha hcts of t?le 38ta Le~lS-
lotuna (1323)tind only minor changes WPQ nade In the codl-
fzcE%t1al0s1925. :
., .’
~’ The statutory definitlaru of chiropody as sot cut
above are aablguous. 'Dlagnoals, mdlcal and su3+&al trsat-
tan&” is the rOngw~g%uaod. 20% this rccn that the dlamosle
plus a treatmat, etthcr medical OF swgical, is required to
constitute the praotka of chiropody, or i.8 ths @i.agno3ls alcae
sufflolent? In ths absence of jxdiciel iato,qrefiat:ou of ths
- statute w look to ths Act as a v3olc, esi&tis to dote.zztis
the legiolative Intent and thereby resolve .tbs smbi&ty of --
the definition. A rticle 4570, R.C.S;, 1925, .as acended by
ths Act8 OS 1933, tith Leglslaturs, @se 363, rscuires that
an ap9llcent for a licsnso to pmatios chirop&y-“‘shall prs- -
aont satlsfaotory ovide~ce of gxduation ~TCU 8 bona fide ’
rsputablo school of chiropody in the fcm of 8 diploea “hi&
has conf~rrsd tha de&m% of Dootorc-r-Sur$cal Chiropody . . .*
Article 4573~ke8 9,mvlsion for the revocction .of a chlrono-
dist’s ficsiw~so and u!.ziq oth%er mouails specifies that cno nvho..
.~.glves swag or sslls drui;s or elcobol for ct%er than logitlmts
purposes In his praotioe; or who 0eg be convicted of amputat-
_ ing ths hman foot or toe c F of uaizq an anssthetic cthor than
local”, may have h20 llcenae rsvoksd.
It n%emsto ws that Srm it reading of tie abovs quote3
&vislons that the Jie&slaturs otitsnplnted thst a chiropodist
as re@ated by our statuteo is ens wlm e~ge:oe not ln the
dlagnosls of ailmx2t+o of ths Soot alarm, butt in’the medical
troatmmt a@ minor aurgarg of the foot aa trsll. Furth*mors,
in repulrlng a tiiplom fTom a *born fide reputable school of
ahlmpody” w thlii~ it was the intention of the Ito~lslaturo
that n ~exz.13chlro adlst should be oqu+ppod to praotico am.l
engas in .ths pmc e fee Of chiropody ti aCc0I-dtx.W with general-.
1~ acoe9ted stnndards a& in t?w accepted field of his call-.
1~ &.ev of tho snbibuous OsfialtLons of ch+cqp&y
and tho lmpllcat’loris gleanoci fxm a read- of the rc,-sula tory
statutes on this subjact as e vholo, vo believe th9 qusstion
_
:
.’
_’ ‘~
i
r
.
<. .
.
Ronorable E, H, Hott; President, Page 3
under consideration should be ruled by the deolslon of State
Board of Medical Examiners VS. Uchln, 156 Atl. 285, a IJew
Jersey case ln which the defendant vas charged with practlc-
lng chiropody without a license. In that aase the Legisla-
ture.had not, attempted to define chiropody vhlle In Texas
our definition 10,ambiguous and indefinite. Relevant quo-
tations from that case sre as follovs:
*The faots, as they appear in’ the testimony,
are that professional vomen investigators employed
by .the State did, on several ocoaslons, venter the
shoe store of the defendant, vho appears to be a
reputable dealer of some twenty years stand- ln
the city of #ev Brunswick, and complained of pains
In the feet. The dealer suggested that they bathe
their feet ln hot water. use soaD. balm. and Powders:
he also had the vltness& remove- their shoes &d -
stand on a. pedigraph (electrical &chine) to take Ia _
picture ~of their feet’. He finally sold them some
nationally knovn proprietary preparations ln the
original packages, havlng pr’ated thereon ‘a written
statement as to their uses, and tlie price printed
thereon.. Defendat else sbld a pair-of s&h sumorts.
The dealer called their attention to the directions .,
on the paokeges. He did not hold himself out as a
‘doctor of chiropody, nor did he cut any corns or
i: oaflusea, nor did he make any charges other than the
-.:. prlnted price for the so-called remedies. (Under-
scotiing ours)
w .‘. “.. .
“L&we ati enaoted to be~read and obeyed by the
peoti1.e at liirge, and vords in oommon use by the people
should b?‘&i.ven the same meaning ln the law as they
have among the people’ who are expeoted to read them. j
Adais V: Lansdon, 18 Idaho, 483, 110 Pac. 280.
.%hlle the removal of corns and calluses con-
stitutes chiropody, according $0 its commonly ac-
cepted definition, I am not ready to hold that the
other treatments alleged to have been sqgested by
the. defendant come within its scope. State v. Arm-
strong,,3a.I*ho, 498, 225 Pac. 491, 33 A.L.R. a362
_ ,. .~
‘. .‘~ 2
., :
, .
-
.
.
-.
,I 56
Zionorzablo Z. H. &tt, Wealdent, Rpgo .j+
ila theicforo concludo, linltlq th+b o~iniod to t3e
facts stated $n tha outtet, ti-mt .thcy da not disclose a CXi81c .
of the pxaotice or chlzqmdy mdcr mr !Wcaa atatutee. To
hola othe-rulss, VoUld ,subject th? cu8tcz1&me and boat asker
. to the re@atltma horse u.?or cmsidomtlca cs ha mmt’mcoa-
sorlly igw,* tho ph7slcal o!!23\moter2st~oa of tie foot irr orc!or
to provide the doolred ccsrort end sugpmt in a Gme for his
ouatcwr. It would lilroly aI~bm~o ths shoe tZfik3ESKiuh:, re-
cccmmdad a certtln last or mah to cor?t?lbute to the foot
oazfort di bla gstrcn. Ue bo~love t.@t such a bcldhg vould
be roro4Qjn to tho Lntontor the Legislature. ..
.* .
very rawly youra
i: