Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Addiego v. State

Decided: October 12, 1978.

BENJAMIN J. ADDIEGO AND ANTHONY ADDIEGO, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
STATE OF NEW JERSEY AND NEW JERSEY STATE BOARD OF DENTISTRY, DEFENDANTS



Schoch, A.j.s.c.

Schoch

[163 NJSuper Page 99] In this litigation plaintiffs, both licensed dentists specializing in orthodontics, seek a declaratory judgment that certain sections of Title 45 are unconstitutional, thereby preventing defendant Board from proceeding

with any hearings to discipline the plaintiffs for violating those sections.

At the trial, the following facts were stipulated:

1. Plaintiffs are dentists licensed to practice in the State of New Jersey pursuant to N.J.S.A. 45:6-1 et seq.

2. Plaintiffs specialize in orthodontics.

3. Defendant State Board is a state agency created and empowered to regulate the practice of dentistry.

4. On or about November 10, 1976 defendant State Board caused a regulatory board proceeding to be commenced against plaintiffs for alleged violations of N.J.S.A. 45:6-7(d) and (e).

5. The law, as understood and applied by defendant State Board, prohibits licensed dentists from delegating the following functions to a dental auxiliary, notwithstanding that said functions are performed upon the direction and under the supervision and control of a licensed dentist:

(a) Preliminary sizing of orthodontic bands by placing preformed ovular bands over the patient's teeth prior to final selection by the dentist of the appropriate size band;

(b) Removal of the excess cement from patient's teeth after the dentist had cemented the orthodontic bands in place;

(c) Ligating a preformed archwire, selected by the dentist, in a fully seated position in an edgewire bracket, and

(d) Removal of an archwire.

Evidence was presented at the trial from which I find that the usual treatment given by orthodontists is performed in the following steps:

1. Examination of the patient using whatever diagnostic aids are required to determine the need for orthodontic treatment, and a determination of the method or methods to be followed.

2. A review of the diagnosis and recommendations with the patient's parents (this specialty appears to be devoted primarily to treatment of children) and obtaining consent to proceed.

3. Preliminary sizing of bands, a procedure which is primarily a trial and error method, using preformed bands, to get an approximate ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.