Court Opinion

ID: 9565646
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:25:09.174405+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:48.718391
License: Public Domain

Andersen, J.
(concurring in the result) — Here the trial court found as follows:
2.2 Plaintiff's license status: Lester E. Griffith is licensed in the State of Washington to practice drugless healing, as a naturopath, pursuant to chapter 18.36 RCW and is not licensed to practice medicine and surgery pursuant to chapter 18.71 RCW, and is not licensed to practice as a midwife pursuant to chapter 18.50 RCW.
2.3 Obstetrics: Obstetrics is the branch of medicine that cares for women during pregnancy, labor and the puerperium.
2.4 Scope of practice: Obstetrics is outside the scope of practice given to individuals licensed to practice pursuant to chapter 18.36 RCW.
There was no genuine issue of material fact as to any of this. CR 56.
Based on the foregoing, "Lester E. Griffith [was] permanently restrained and enjoined from the practice of medicine and surgery, specifically the practice of obstetrics, as defined above, by caring for women during pregnancy, labor and the puerperium unless and until a valid certificate to practice medicine and surgery or midwifery in the State of Washington is secured by Lester E. Griffith."
*734The trial court's action was squarely in accordance with the State Supreme Court's holding in State v. Houck, 32 Wn.2d 681, 203 P.2d 693 (1949), and on that basis, I agree that it should be affirmed. See also State v. Wilson, 11 Wn. App. 916, 528 P.2d 279 (1974).
For these reasons, I concur in the result of the majority opinion.
Reconsideration denied October 18, 1979.