Miller v. Johnson
Citations
- 110 Kan. 135
- 202 P. 619
- 1921 Kan. LEXIS 183
Syllabus
<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. State Board of Embalming — Authority to Promulgate and Enforce Rules Regulating the Embalming of Human Bodies — Power to Revoke Embalmer’s License. The statute (Gen. Stat. 1915, §§ 10293-10309), which authorizes the state board of embalming to make rules,'not inconsistent with the laws of this state or of the United States, regulating the embalming of dead human, bodies, and to conduct examinations to issue licenses to qualified persons for the practice of embalming, etc., is sufficient authority for the state board of embalming to promulgate and enforce a rule for the revocation of a license issued and accepted pursuant' thereto, for the infraction of a valid rule of such board. -</p> <p>2. Same. Under the powers conferred by law upon the state board of embalming to make rules touching the practice of embalming and to issue licenses to persons found to be duly qualified, such board has power, for good cause shown, and upon due notice and a fair hearing, to revoke an embalmer’s license when he confesses to have violated a valid rule of the board, notwithstanding such violation is also a misdemeanor punishable by a fine.</p> <p>3. Same — Statute Authorizing Board of Embalming to Promulgate and Enforce Its Rules Constitutional. There is no constitutional objection to the embalmer’s statute which declares it to be a misdemeanor to violate a reasonable rule of the state board of embalming, although the rule is only promulgated by virtue of that statute and the rule itself is not prescribed until after the statute declaring its infraction to be such misdemeanor is enacted.</p> <p>4. Same — Under Facts Shovm No Breach of Statute Appears. The facts confessed by plaintiff in a hearing before the state board of embalming, on a complaint that he had violated the law and a certain rule of the board made' pursuant thereto, examined, and held to be no breach of the statute itself.</p> <p>5. Same — Rules of Embalming Board Must Be Reasonable. W
Judges: Dawson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
7 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Ware v. City of WichitaSupreme Court of Kansas· 1923-01-15· cited 67×
- Quesenberry v. EstepWest Virginia Supreme Court· 1956-12-22· cited 34×
- State v. Memorial Gardens Development Corp.West Virginia Supreme Court· 1957-12-03· cited 28×
- Ray v. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of Kansas· 1966-01-22· cited 27×
- Capland v. Board of Dental ExaminersSupreme Court of Kansas· 1939-03-04· cited 12×
- Jones v. Kansas State Board of Medical Registration & ExaminationSupreme Court of Kansas· 1922-07-08· cited 11×
- State v. Memorial Gardens Development Corp.West Virginia Supreme Court· 1958-01-14
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. WilsonSupreme Court of Kansas· 1917-11-10· cited 57×
- City of Emporia v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas· 1915-04-10· cited 18×
- Bogert v. City of IndianapolisIndiana Supreme Court· 1859-11-15· cited 16×
- City of Lebanon v. ZanditonSupreme Court of Kansas· 1907-02-09· cited 11×
- State v. MeyerSupreme Court of Kansas· 1915-03-06· cited 5×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.