Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 17-81-303 (2026)

Unlawful practice — Penalty — Injunction

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Any person who practices or attempts to practice chiropractic, as defined in this chapter, or use any sign, card, or device to indicate that the person is a professional licensed doctor of chiropractic without having first been licensed or otherwise permitted under the provisions of this chapter to do so shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Upon conviction, he or she shall be punished by a fine of not less than one thousand dollars ($1,000) nor more than five thousand dollars ($5,000) or by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of not less than one (1) month nor more than eleven (11) months, or by both fine and imprisonment. Each day shall constitute a separate offense.
The courts of this state having general equity jurisdiction are vested with jurisdiction and power to enjoin the unlawful practice of chiropractic in a proceeding by the Arkansas State Board of Chiropractic Examiners or any member thereof, by any citizen of this state in the county in which the alleged unlawful practice occurred or in which the defendant resides, or in Pulaski County. The issuance of an injunction shall not relieve a person from criminal prosecution for violation of the provisions of this chapter, but the remedy of injunction shall be in addition to liability to criminal prosecution.
1. It is unlawful for any person other than a physician licensed to practice chiropractic under the provisions of the Arkansas Chiropractic Practices Act, § 17-81-101 et seq., or a physician licensed to practice medicine under the Arkansas Medical Practices Act, § 17-95-201 et seq., § 17-95-301 et seq., and § 17-95-401 et seq., to perform spinal mobilizations, spinal adjustments, or spinal manipulations as those terms are defined in § 17-81-102.
2. Nothing contained in this subsection shall be construed to limit or restrict the authority of a licensed physical therapist to practice physical therapy as defined in § 17-93-102(7).
3. Any person violating the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a violation and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine of not more than five thousand dollars ($5,000), and each violation shall constitute a separate offense.
1. If the board determines after due notice and a hearing that any provision of this chapter or any rule promulgated by the board pursuant to this chapter has been violated, the board may impose a civil penalty not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000) per violation.
2. 1. The board may file an action in Pulaski County Circuit Court to collect any civil penalty not paid within thirty (30) days of service of the order assessing the penalty unless the circuit court enters a stay of the board's order.
  2. If the board prevails in the action, the defendant shall be directed to pay reasonable attorney's fees and costs incurred by the board in prosecuting the action in addition to the civil penalty.
3. Any person aggrieved by an action of the board imposing civil penalties may appeal the decision in the manner and under the procedure prescribed in the Arkansas Administrative Procedure Act, § 25-15-201 et seq., for appeals from administrative decisions.

History. Acts 1971, No. 706, §§ 2, 14, 22; A.S.A. 1947, §§ 72-416, 72-428, 72-436; Acts 1987, No. 50, §§ 1, 2; 1987, No. 354, § 9; 1991, No. 983, §§ 1, 2; 2001, No. 197, §§ 2, 3; 2005, No. 1994, § 479; 2019, No. 315, § 1510.

Amendments. The 2019 amendment substituted “rule” for “regulation” in (d)(1).

Case Notes

In General.

Circuit court did not err in excluding the finding of the Arkansas State Board of Chiropractic Examiners that the physical therapist was practicing chiropractic medicine without a license because the board did not find that his practice of chiropractic medicine was negligent or below the standard of care; the court found that the fact that the therapist had committed a statutory violation would have been unfairly prejudicial. Fryar v. Touchstone Physical Therapy, Inc., 365 Ark. 295, 229 S.W.3d 7 (2006).

Spinal Manipulations by Physical Therapist.

Evidence supported the Arkansas State Board of Chiropractic Examiners' finding that physical therapist's treatments, which caused his patients' spines to “pop,” were “spinal manipulations” as defined in § 17-81-102 and could only be performed by licensed chiropractors. Teston v. Ark. State Bd. of Chiropractic Examiners, 361 Ark. 300, 206 S.W.3d 796, cert. denied, 546 U.S. 960, 126 S. Ct. 480, 163 L. Ed. 2d 363 (2005).

Cited: Mason v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 285, 435 S.W.3d 510 (2014).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 2005–2014 · leading case: Teston v. Arkansas State Bd. of Chiropractic Examiners, 206 S.W.3d 796 (Ark. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Teston v. Arkansas State Bd. of Chiropractic Examiners, 206 S.W.3d 796 (Ark. 2005). · cites it 8× “Based on Hendrix’s investigation, the Board sent Teston a notice of hearing in which the Board alleged that Teston was practicing chiropractic without a license, in violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 17-81-303 (Repl. 2002). During the pendency of the Chiropractic Board’s…”

Fryar v. Touchstone Physical Therapy, Inc., 229 S.W.3d 7 (Ark. 2006). · cites it 4× “Fryar violated Ark. Code Ann. § 17-81-303 (a)(1) (Repl. 2002), which prohibits the practice and offer to practice chiropractic medicine in the State of Arkansas without a license.”

Mason v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 285 (Ark. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “See Ark.Code Ann. § 17-81-303 (Repl.2010). Mason did not file a motion challenging the statute’s constitutionality or notify the attorney general of his constitutional challenge, nor did he present legal authority to the trial |scourt supporting his position.”

Teston v. Ark. State Bd. of Chirop. Exam., 206 S.W.3d 796 (Ark. 2005). · cites it 8× “Based on Hendrix's investigation, the Board sent Teston a notice of hearing in which the Board alleged that Teston was practicing chiropractic without a license, in violation of Ark.Code Ann. § 17-81-303 (Repl.2002). During the pendency of the Chiropractic Board's investigation…”

— Ark. Code Ann. § 17-81-303(a)(1) — 1 case

Teston v. Ark. State Bd. of Chirop. Exam., 206 S.W.3d 796 (Ark. 2005). “Based on Hendrix's investigation, the Board sent Teston a notice of hearing in which the Board alleged that Teston was practicing chiropractic without a license, in violation of Ark.Code Ann. § 17-81-303 (Repl.2002). During the pendency of the Chiropractic Board's investigation…”

— Ark. Code Ann. § 17-81-303(d)(1) — 1 case

— Ark. Code Ann. § 17-81-303(d)(2) — 1 case

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.