Opinion

State ex rel. Mayers v. Gray

  • 4 Ohio Law. Abs. 182
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Jul 1, 1926
Status
Published
Author
Allen
On the bench
Allen, Day, Kinkade, Marshall, Robinson
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

ALLEN, J.

1. Under the provisions of Section 1295-31, General Code (110 O. L. 22) the State Board of Optometry in revoking a license for grossly unprofessional conduct, is performing an executive and not a judicial function.

2. The extraordinary wi’it of mandamus will not issue to compel the- State Board of Optometry to reinstate the license of an optometrist who has been notified of charges embodied in an affidavit, given an opportunity to make a statement and to produce witnesses in his own behalf, and has failed so to do.

Demurrer sustained.

Marshall, CJ., Day, Kinkade and Robinson, JJ., concur.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.