Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

,. ., &.. .,, .Awe- 11. TEXAS WILL WILSON A-l-l-0-X GENERAL Honorable Bill Hollowell Chairman, State Affairs Committee House of Representatives Austin, Texas Opinion No. W-1045 Re: Constitutionality of House Bill 828 of the 57th Legls- lature, relating to licensing of clinical laboratories and Dear Mr. Hollowell: clinical laboratory directors. You have requested an opinion on the constltutional- ity of House Bill 828 of the 57th Legislature which provides for a licensing of clinical laboratories and clinical labora- tory directors through the Texas State Health Department. A clinical laboratory and clinical laboratory dlrec- tor are defined in Section.2 of the Act aa~follone:~ " 0)) 'Clinical Laboratory' means any place, establishment or institution organized and operated for the practical application of one or more of the funda- mental sciences by the use of specialized apparatus, equipment and methods for the purpose of obtaining scientific data which may be used by a licensed physlclan as an aid in ascertaining the presence, progress and/or source of disease In human beings, or the state of health of an individual; provided, however, x-ray laboratories shall not be included in this definition. "CC) 'Clinical Laboratory Director' means any person licensed under this chapter to engage fn the direction of a clinical laboratory." . . Honorable Bill Hollowell, page 2 (WW-1045) Other sections of the Act make It unlawful to oper- ate a clinlcal,laboratory or act as a director of such unless duly licensed by the licensing agency, the State,Health Depart- ment, and give to the Health Department certain authority in connection with the appllcatlons for and Issuance of the ll- censea and the establishment of rules and regulations necessary for the proper administration of the provisions of the Act. House Bill 828 contains but one subject which is expressed in its title and the body of the Bill conforms to the caption and Is, therefore, in compliance with the provisions of Section 35 of Article III of the Constitution of Texas. Section 31 of Article XVI of the Constitution of Texas provides: "The Legislature may pass laws pre- scribing the qualifications of practitioners of medicine In this State, and to punish persons for malpraatlce, but no preference shall ever be given by law to any schools of medicine." In view of the provisions of Section 31 of Article XVI above quoted, the Legislature Is not authorlied to allow Individuals to practice medicine without requiring such ind~i-.- viduals to meet the reaulrements for license to nractlce medi- cine. Wilson v. State-Board of Naturopathic Examiners, 298 S.W.2d 94b (Clv.App. 1957 , error re ., n.r.e., aer . en., U.S. 870, reh.den., 355 U.S. 920); Schllchtlng v. Texas St% Board of Medical Examiners, 158 Tex. 279, 310 S.W.2d 557 (1958). In view of the foregoing, the constitutionality of House Bill 828 Is dependent on whether Its provisions would authorize an individual licensed thereunder, to perform acts which constitute the practice of medicine as defined by Article 4510, Vernon's Civil Statutes and Article 741, Vernon's Penal Code. In conetrL%ng the pr0vlsiOas,of ths Medical Practice A0O~~~~f~~V?t%f4 held'in F.W.B.'RoCkett, M.D. v. State Board of Medical Examiners, 287 S.W.2d 190 (Civ.App. 195b, errorref., n.r.e.): I, . . . ~By the pleadings of appellant, his testimony, and the stipulations of the parties, It was conclusively established Honorable Bill Hollowell, page 3 (WW-1045) that: Appellant was.em loyed by Thomas Clinic for a salary of 500 per month and he received no fees; the Clinic was owned by Ralph C. Thomas, who was not a medical doctor and no medical doctor owned any interest in the clinic; appellant per- formed medical services for the clinic and the fees for such services were collected by the clinic. Such conduct on the part of appellant was In effect 'permitting, or allowing, another to use his license or certificate to practice medicine in this State, for the purpose of treating, or offering to treat, sick, Injured, or afflicted human beings', which conduct is prohibited by the provisions of Section 12 of Art. 4505, Vernon's Ann.Civ.Stats., and Is made a ground for the forfeiture of a license to practice medicine by the pro- visions of Art. 4506, Vernon's Ann.Clv.Stats. See Section 5, Art. 4505." See also Kee v. Baber, 157 Tex. 387, 303 S.W.2d 376 (1957); Texas State Board of Examiners In Optometry v. Carp, -Tex.--, 343 S W 26 242 (lgbl); and Attorney Qeneral's Opln- Ion No. ~~-278 il957). While the definitions in Section 2 do not clearly specify or limit all acts which might or might not be performed by a clinical laboratory,~It Is noted that.Sectlon 15 ~of House ~111 828 specifically provides: "Nothing in this Act or the licensing hereunder shall be construed as authorizing or permitting any person to practice medl- alne or to furnish the services of a physician for the practice of medicine, and nothing in this Act shall repeal or In any manner affect any provision of the code relating to the praa- tice of medicine, and nothing In this Act shall affect any clinical laboratory or lab- oratories operated by the State of Texas, the Federal Government, or any subdivision thereof, or a physician licensed in the arts of healing. All laboratory work done by clinical labora- tories licensed hereunder shall be done only upon request of a physician licensed in the healing arts by the State of Texas, or a phy- sician licensed in the state in which he practices, and all reports of the findings made in the tests conducted by the laboratory shall be reported only to the person requesting . ” Honorable Bill Hollowell, page.4 (WW-1045) said test or.to the person or persons designated by the person making such request." In view of the provisions of Section 15, an Individual licensed in accordance with the provisions of House Bill 828 is not permitted to perform any act which would conatltute the practice of medicine in this State. On the contrary, such individuals perform chemical analyses and tests conducted by the laboratory for the use and benefit of lndlvlduals licensed to practice medicine in this State. Therefore, It Is our opfn- ion that the provisions of House Bill 828 do not violate the provisions of Section 31,of Article XVI of the Constitution of Texas. We do not find any provision in House Bill 828 which violates any other provision of the Constitution of Texas and you are, therefore, advised that its provisions are aonstltu- tlonal and valld. SUMMARY House Bill 828 of the 57th Legis- lature, relating to licensing of clinical .laboratdrieszdoes not. " authorize the performance of acts . which constitute the practice of medicine and is;therefore, not In violation of,Sectlon 31 of Article XVI of the Constitution of Texas and Its provisions are conatltu- tlonal and valid. Yours vefy truly, WILL WILSON Attorney General of Texas JR:afg APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTFX W. V. Geppert, Chairman . . . Honorable Bill Hollowell, page 5 (WW-1045) Leon Pesek Jack Price Ray Loft123 Llnward Shivers REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNiY GENERAL BY: Morgan Nesbltt