Meeker v. Scudder

140 N.E. 627, 1 Ohio Law. Abs. 867, 108 Ohio St. 423, 1923 Ohio LEXIS 210
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided June 26, 1923·No. Nos. 17819, 17838·Published·Cited by 19 cases

Opinion

Epitomized Opinion

An action was brought by Meeker et al in the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton county to enjoin Scudder et al from administering the Ohio Medical Act under the recent Administrative Code, charging among other things that the defendants, especially the members of the Ohio State Medical Board, were unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious in their administration of such law, particularly against the defendants and the class they represent. All of the plaintiffs were chiropractors, and they claimed that the State Medical Board was discriminating against theml An injunction was prayed for and denied. The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court. In sustaining the judgment of the lower courts, the Supreme Court in Official Syllabus, as follows:

1. “The Administrative Code, Vol. 109, Ohio Laws, p. 105 et seq., so far as it affects the Ohio State iMedieal Board, does not violate any provision of the bátate or Federal Constitution.

2. “Applicants for a license to practice any calling or profession under the laws of the State of Ohio must stand upon their individual rights and qualifications, and they must not join for the purpose of instituting a class suit to determine the unconstitutionality of an act of the General Assembly.

4. “Under Section 11271, General Code, actions against the Ohio State Medical Board and other public officers having their official places of business in Franklin county, and in no other county, can be instituted only in Franklin county.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Meeker v. Scudder, 140 N.E. 627, 1 Ohio Law. Abs. 867, 108 Ohio St. 423, 1923 Ohio LEXIS 210 (Ohio 1923).

140 N.E. 627 (Meeker v. Scudder) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Johnson v. Inslee
496 P.3d 1191 (Washington Supreme Court, 2021)
State, Ex Rel. Cook v. Zimpher
463 N.E.2d 1274 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1983)
Ebenezer Society v. Minnesota State Board of Health
223 N.W.2d 385 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1974)
Haught v. City of Dayton
295 N.E.2d 404 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1973)
State Ex Rel. Marshall v. Civil Service Commission
228 N.E.2d 913 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1967)
State ex rel. Schulman v. City of Cleveland
220 N.E.2d 386 (Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court, 1966)
Tudesque v. New Mexico State Board of Barber Examiners
331 P.2d 1104 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1958)
United Steelworkers v. Doyle
77 Ohio Law. Abs. 385 (Mahoning County Court of Common Pleas, 1958)
State ex rel. Rhodes v. Solether
162 Ohio St. (N.S.) 559 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1955)
Colbert v. Coney Island, Inc.
121 N.E.2d 911 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1954)
State Ex Rel. Hawley v. Industrial Commission
30 N.E.2d 332 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1940)
State, Ex Rel. McGann v. Evatt, Tax Commr.
27 N.E.2d 490 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1940)
State ex rel. McCale v. Industrial Commission
132 Ohio St. (N.S.) 647 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1937)
State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.
9 N.E.2d 691 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1937)
Lo Presti v. Scott
5 Ohio Law. Abs. 565 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1926)
Conn v. Jones
152 N.E. 897 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1926)
Riegel v. State Ex Rel. Weaver
151 N.E. 784 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1926)