**OFFICE OF**  **THE Al-l-ORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN** 

Honorable Carl C. tludla, Jr., Exeautive secrotery Tezae state Boerd

## or Derrkl Eeam1rYre bet irr, mx8e
mar Sir:

**Wo quote**  **Jotw** l yove qrret lone **y thie**  departwnt.

lag eeverel lere dleplay a&euhlch to myltteotlorr leAttorwy r0r the
<or m~tai mm8~8. tar coaehtesclble brieritbg, it is myoplaloa tint **these dieplay**  **8de aPe**  la dinat vloletioa 

## or Artlale 752b0r the Ibwl code, paragrcrphe(e) and (a), endthe laet paragraph in uld article enamemdod. I arrived et thle dealeloa b7 tlrtue ai tba len&hy **dleeueslon** la the taoee, Ruetve. Yleoouri Detrtal soard, 155s. u. (2d) 80; winberry, et al. ve.Honorable **Carl** C. liardla. Jr., - Page 2

Ballihaa, et al., 197 R. B. 552, Johnoon vo. Board 

## 0r Dental Examiners, Dentists Inc., 134 **Fed.** (26) 9 and Hodern System

et al, vs. state Board

## 0r Dental Examiners 

## 0rwis., 256 8. W. 922, and I would appreciate an opinion from you as to whether the enuloeed ads are in violation 

## 0rthe paragraphs 

## 0r the article alted.

‘I em‘also enoloolng a copy 

## 0r a Brief prepsred for Dr. B. Carl Holder, President of the Texas State Board of Dental Bxamlnece, in connection vlth the last paragraph 

## 0r Artlclo 752b 

## 0r the Penal code, as amended; **and,** after an examlnatlon of thlo Brief, I would appreciate a separate written opinion on your conetructlon or the article oovered by myBrief.” In our Oplnlon Ho: O-1992, weconetruedcArtlale 752b, Vernon’s Annotated Penal Code of Texee, and stated a8 rollowo;

“IWour letter you ask the rollowing questions:

“@In other words under Article 752b, -supra, taken as a whole, maydentist, without enfrlnglng the criminal lava, advertise in ray mennerand vith as muchspace as he desires, so long as he does not v$o+ate one of the specific prohlbltlone in subsection a through ‘t “, or 1s his advertising limited by the provleo, to a mere statement of his nams, degree, office location, ete?’

“In answering this question wewould first point out aa stated above that apparent intention of the Leglelature ~0s to preserve a long standing customary right to the dentist and not to restrict him. Certainly since this la a criminal statute and must be strictly construed, it vould seemclear that the dentist could advertise la any mannerand with as muchapace as he desires so loag as his advertising did not fall under the prohibited practices of the sxtlcle in question.

‘%fetherefore respectfully advise that Article 752b, Penal Code as amended, is valid and constitutional and the proviso. at the end of said article Is permiselve rather than restrictive. * 

# cHonorable Carl C. Rardln. Jr., - Pegs 3

“B”

. Webelieve that the foregoing answer0your qwetlon

The last peragraph of Article 752b meynot be madethe basis for a criminal proseautlon slnce said paragraph prohibits nopractice whatsoever, but merely lndlaates the type 

### ofedvertlslng which a dentist mayemploy vlthout violating any of the provlsloas 0r the Act. It 1s our .oplnlon, therefore, that ths advertisements submitted do not constitute violationa of the said paragraph.

Wedo not believe that a7 of the advertloemsnts submitted by you violate subseetloa (‘0 of Article 752b, for la Opinion Ro. O-2743 ooncernlng that subsection, ue statedr ::.* “%orge display algnat mentioned in this subdivision, whenconsidered la connection with other thQngs mentlooad la the eubdlrisloh, aust be ametrwd as something other than newspaper adventlee- .I merits.* In our oplnlon, each of the advertleenmnts oonetltutea a fact situation to be deternlwd by the jury as to whether or not the etatemsnts mad8lo such advertisements 

### are "ofsuch a character tending to mislead or deaelve the public” and thereby a violation of suboectlon (e) of Article 7521,.

**We trust**  that thio satisfactorily answers your inquiry. Yours very truly ATTORNEY

GERfGRAL

**OF**TFZAS

Ks sin? James II. Ware