K.S.A. » Chapter 65
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 65-1421 (2026)

License required to practice dentistry or dental hygiene

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

65-1421. License required to practice dentistry or dental hygiene. It shall be unlawful for any person to practice dentistry or dental hygiene in the state of Kansas, except:

(a) Those who are now duly licensed dentists, pursuant to law;

(b) those who are now duly licensed dental hygienists, pursuant to law;

(c) those who may hereafter be duly licensed as dentists or dental hygienists, pursuant to the provisions of this act.

History: L. 1943, ch. 221, § 4; L. 2000, ch. 169, § 1; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1977–2018 · leading case: Tompkins v. Bise, 910 P.2d 185 (Kan. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tompkins v. Bise, 910 P.2d 185 (Kan. 1996). · cites it 2× “Captline, as a dentist, would be licensed by the State Dental Board if practicing in Kansas (K.S.A. 65-1421, K.S.A. 74-1404). The "profession" in which Captline *52 is licensed is dentistry.”
Johnson v. Kansas Dep't of Revenue, 27 P.3d 943 (Kan. Ct. App. 2001). “In Pitts , the Kansas Supreme Court held that the mere absence of language in the Kansas Dental Act, K.S.A. 65-1421 et. seq., authorizing reinstatement of a *459 dentist’s previously revoked license did not reflect the legislative intent to permanently bar the Dental Board from…”
Bongers v. Madrigal, 563 P.2d 515 (Kan. Ct. App. 1977). “The injunction, filed June 12, 1959, prohibited the defendant from violating the provisions of the Kansas Dental Act (K.S.A. 65-1421 et seq. [then G.S. 1949 65-1421]) and in particular enjoined the defendant, David A.”
Pearson v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 430 P.3d 475 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018). “, authorizing reinstatement of a dentist's previously revoked license did not reflect the legislative intent to permanently bar the Dental Board from readmitting such dentists into the profession. However, the Dental Board was not relitigating the facts which prompted the…”
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.