*This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of

the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. This court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Filed 9/6/96 TENTH CIRCUIT

RONALD B. TRIPP, D.C.; CAROL DOROW, D.C.; OKLAHOMA STATE CHIROPRACTIC ASSOCIATION, an Oklahoma corporation,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v. GAYLORD SNITKER, D.C., individually; KENNETH CHERRY, D.C., individually; RICHARD KARAM, individually; THE JOINT CHIROPRACTIC ASSOCIATION OF OKLAHOMA, an Oklahoma corporation,

Defendants - Appellees. No. 95-6220 (D. Ct. No. CIV-94-285-M) (W.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before TACHA, MCWILLIAMS, and MURPHY, Circuit Judge s.
In 1992, the State of Oklahoma Board of Chiropracti c Examiners (the Board) refused to accredit a continuing education c lass developed by Ronald- 2 -

Tripp and Carol Dorow, under the auspices of the Ok lahoma State Chiropractic Association (OSCA). All chiropractors in Oklahoma are required to attend and pay for continuing education classes, and the only accredited program that year was that provided by the Joint Chiropractic Association (JCA). JCA used some of the funds collected from its continuing education c lasses to promote issues related to the chiropractic industry. Tripp, Dorow, and th e OSCA sued individual members of the Board and the JCA under § 1983 for v iolation of their substantive due process and free association rights, because th ey disagreed with the causes supported by JCA and objected to the use of continu ing education fees to promote those causes. We review the district court's entry of summary jud gment de novo. Applied Genetics Int'l, Inc. v. First Affiliated Sec., Inc. , 912 F.2d 1238, 1241 (10th Cir. 1990). "Summary judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine dispute over a material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law," Russillo v. Scarborough , 935 F.2d 1167, 1170 (10th Cir. 1991), but "we mus t view the record in a light most favorable to the pa rt[y] opposing the motion for summary judgment," Deepwater Invs., Ltd. v. JacksonHole Ski Corp. , 938 F.2d 1105, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). The plaintiffs argue that the district court erred in granting qualified immunity to the individual defendants and concludin g that their constitutional- 3 -

rights were not violated by JCA's expenditure of co ntinuing education fees for causes they did not support. They further maintain that the Board violated their substantive due process rights because the Board's denial of OSCA's application for accreditation was arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of governmental authority. After carefully reviewing the record, we AFFIRM the district court's summary judgment orders dated April 4, 1995, and May 10, 1995, for substantially the reasons stated in those orders. Plaintiffs' due process claims were resolved in two orders entered by the districtcourt on October 25, 1994; those orders are also AFFIRMED for substantially th e reasons stated therein. The district court did not dismiss plaintiffs' substant ive due process claim alleging a conspiracy based upon a protected liberty interest. However, this claim was not raised on appeal and is therefore abandoned. See Abercrombie v. City of
Catoosa , 896 F.2d 1228, 1231 n.2 (10th Cir. 1990).- 4 -

The judgment of the United States District Court fo r the Western District of Oklahoma is AFFIRMED. Entered for the Court

Deanell Reece Tacha Circuit Judge