No person shall engage in the practice of dentistry or dental medicine unless such person has first obtained a license from the Department of Public Health.
(1949 Rev., S. 4446; 1959, P.A. 616, S. 32; P.A. 77-614, S. 323, 610; P.A. 80-484, S. 149, 176; P.A. 93-381, S. 9, 39; P.A. 95-257, S. 12, 21, 58.)
History: 1959 act required registration with state department of health; P.A. 77-614 replaced department of health with department of health services, effective January 1, 1979; P.A. 80-484 required that license be obtained from department rather than commissioners and deleted reference to registration with department; P.A. 93-381 replaced department of health services with department of public health and addiction services, effective July 1, 1993; P.A. 95-257 replaced Commissioner and Department of Public Health and Addiction Services with Commissioner and Department of Public Health, effective July 1, 1995.
Prohibition against practicing without license penal in its nature; “practicing” construed. 83 C. 300; 109 C. 74. Hospital which employed unlicensed dental assistant in violation of statute found guilty of corporate negligence; principles governing malpractice are determinative. 133 C. 64. Cited. 141 C. 288; 149 C. 262.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases, 1962–2018 · leading case:
State v. Jones, 598 S.E.2d 125 (N.C. 2004).
State v. Jones, 598 S.E.2d 125 (N.C. 2004).
“C.G.S. § 20-106 (2003) (providing that a person guilty of receiving or transferring stolen vehicles “shall be punished as a Class H felon”); N.”
Obuchowski v. Dental Comm'n, 178 A.2d 537 (Conn. 1962).
· cites it 4× “General Statutes §§ 20-106, 20-123. The appendix to the plaintiff’s brief contains the record of the entire proceedings before the commission at the hearing on November 16, 1959.”
State v. Howell, 811 S.E.2d 570 (N.C. 2018).
· cites it 2× “C.G.S. § 20-106 (2003) (providing that a person guilty of receiving or transferring stolen vehicles “shall be punished as a Class H felon”); N.”
OCA v. Christie, 415 F. Supp. 2d 115 (D. Conn. 2006).
· cites it 4× “Defendants argue that based upon the terms of the SPA and the BSA, OCA and OCS “own” or “operate” a dental office and “own” or “carry on” a dental practice or business in violation of Connecticut General Statutes §§ 20-106, 20-122 and 20-123.”
In the Matter of Kjh, 652 S.E.2d 71 (N.C. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 2× “C.G.S. § 20-106; and (2) speeding to elude arrest in violation of N.”
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.