noting that “[o]ur traditional method of rule evaluation is by reference to Supreme Court Committee, report and recommendation by that committee, and finally, a decision by this Court”
How later courts described this case
- noting that “[o]ur traditional method of rule evaluation is by reference to Supreme Court Committee, report and recommendation by that committee, and finally, a decision by this Court”
- regulation singling out osteopaths from other medical personnel upheld under rational basis test
- treating trade names as form of commercial speech
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
HANDLER, J.,
concurring in the result and dissenting in part.
For affirmance—Chief Justice WILENTZ and Justices PASHMAN, SCHREIBER, HANDLER, POLLOCK and O’HERN—6.
For reversal —None.