STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA
OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

September 20, 1968

W. L. Sewell, DDS, Secretary
South Dakota State Board of Dental Examiners
Webster, South Dakota 57274

OFFICIAL OPINION NO. 68-31

Dentistry - Proper name to use in such practice SDC 27.0612

Dear Secretary Sewell:

You have requested my opinion as to whether or not licensed dentists may practice dentistry in this state under either of the following names:

FIRST: "The John Doe Dental Group"

SECOND: "The High Sierra Dental Office"

In each instance more than one dentist is associated in the same dental office. In the first instance, John Doe is a licensed dentist, practicing in such office with other dentists. In the second instance, several licensed dentists take turns operating such office, but none of them are named "High Sierra."

The question you have submitted was answered by my predecessor in an opinion reported in 1955-56 AGR 216. In such opinion it was held that the practice of the dental profession by three licensed dentists under the name THE JONES DENTA"L GROUP (one of such licensed dentist) was violative of SDC 27.0612.

The statute has not been amended by the Legislature since this opinion was issued. The opinion seems in accordance with the court's interpretation of similar statutes. (See Lewis v. Mich. State Board of Dentistry, 277 Mich. 334, 269 NW 194 and Toole v. Mich. State Bd. of Dentistry, 306 Mich. 527, 11 NW 2d 229) and the statute itself is proper. (See Modern System Dentist v. State Bd. of Dental Examiners, 216 Wis. 190, 256 NW 922.)

I am in accord with and affirm such prior opinion of this office.

Your attention is called to Chapter 35 of the Session Laws of 1963, whereby our Legislature enacted the Dental Corporation Act. Section 3 expressly provides that in case of conflict between such act and the Dental Practice Act, the Dental Corporation Act prevails. Sec. 4 authorizes any such dental corporation to end its name with "Incorporated," "Professional Association," or the initials, "Inc." or "P.A." Section 5 authorizes your Board to register qualifying dental corporations.

As your inquiry does not disclose either of the dental clinics have incorporated and been registered under the Dental Corporation Act, I am not expressing a definite opinion as to the rights of such registered dental corporation. However, it would appear that because of the legislative grant of the use of name, that if the dental offices in question were incorporated and registered, there would be no violation of the law for such to use the name "The John Doe Dental Group, Inc." or the "High Sierra Professional Association," without disclosing the names of the stockholders of such corporation.

It is my conclusion that the group practice of dentistry, by either an individual, co-partners, or by an employer-employee, such group not having become incorporated and registered under the provisions of the Dental Corporation Act, under the above designations, is violative of SDC 27.0612.

Respectfully submitted,

Frank L. Farrar
Attorney General