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&e uhlch 

to my l tteotlorr l e Attorwy r0r the 

<or m~tai mm8~8. 

tar coaehtesclble brieritbg, it is my oplaloa 

tint these dieplay 8de aPe la dinat vloletioa or 

Artlale 752b 0r the Ibwl code, paragrcrphe (e) and 

(a), end the laet paragraph in uld article en amemdod. 

I arrived et thle dealeloa b7 tlrtue ai tba len&hy 

dleeueslon la the taoee, Ruet ve. Yleoouri Detrtal 

soard, 155 s. 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 0r wis., 256 8. W. 922, and I would appreciate 

an opinion from you as to whether the enuloeed ads are 

in violation 0r the 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 my Brief.” 

In our Oplnlon Ho: O-1992, we conetruedcArtlale 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, may dentist, without enfrlnglng the criminal 

lava, advertise in ray menner and vith as much space 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 we would 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 seem clear that the dentist could advertise la 

any manner and with as much apace as he desires so loag 

as his advertising did not fall under the prohibited 

practices of the sxtlcle in question. 

‘%fe therefore 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. * 

c 
Honorable Carl C. Rardln. Jr., - Pegs 3 

“B” . 

We believe that the foregoing answer0 your qwetlon 

The last peragraph of Article 752b mey not be made the 

basis for a criminal proseautlon slnce said paragraph prohibits 

no practice whatsoever, but merely lndlaates the type of edvertlslng which a dentist may employ 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. 

We do not believe that a 

7 

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, when considered 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 mad8 lo such advertisements are "of such 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