466.001

Legislative purpose and intent.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

466.001 Legislative purpose and intent.—The legislative purpose for enacting this chapter is to ensure that every dentist or dental hygienist practicing in this state meets minimum requirements for safe practice without undue clinical interference by persons not licensed under this chapter. It is the legislative intent that dental services be provided only in accordance with the provisions of this chapter and not be delegated to unauthorized individuals. It is the further legislative intent that dentists and dental hygienists who fall below minimum competency or who otherwise present a danger to the public shall be prohibited from practicing in this state. All provisions of this chapter relating to the practice of dentistry and dental hygiene shall be liberally construed to carry out such purpose and intent.

History.—ss. 1, 3, ch. 79-330; ss. 2, 3, ch. 81-318; ss. 1, 23, 24, ch. 86-291; s. 60, ch. 91-137; s. 7, ch. 91-156; s. 4, ch. 91-429; s. 1, ch. 97-67.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1984–1997 · leading case: Thomas A. Schopler, D.D.S. v. Rupert Bliss

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Thomas A. Schopler, D.D.S. v. Rupert Bliss (1990) ca11 “” Fla.Stat. §§ 466.001, 466.004. Among other things, the Board is authorized to promulgate rules governing advertising by dentists.”

Dept. of Prof. Reg., Bd. of Dentistry v. Dental Hygienist Ass'n (1993) fladistctapp “Under this general standard, there would be no requirement that dental hygienists attend any school or college, a possibility clearly ruled out long ago by the legislature, as the hearing officer's charting of the legislative course since 1927 shows.”

Cowan v. People ex rel. Florida Dental Ass'n (1984) fladistctapp “3 FDA maintains that section 466.001 makes violations of section 466.”

Cowan v. PEOPLE EX REL. FLA. DENTAL ASS'N (1985) fladistctapp “[3] FDA maintains that section 466.001 makes violations of section 466.”

Board of Dentistry v. Payne (1997) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “” § 466.001, Fla. Stat. (1995). The Board was apparently influenced by matters of record suggesting that lasers have qualitatively different effects on human tissue than do other dental instru-mentalities.”

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.