Texas Attorney General Opinion: DM-498 Page: 4 of 10
10 p.View a full description of this text.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Mr. Ron Allen - Page 4
be subject to having his license canceled, revoked, or suspended by the Board of Veterinary Medical
Examiners.
However, you have asked whether the corporation's ownership of the clinic constitutes the
practice of veterinary medicine, regardless of the relationship between the corporation and the
veterinarian. Whether a corporation is engaging in the practice of veterinary medicine in violation
of law is a fact question,'0 which cannot be addressed in an attorney general opinion.I" You provide
facts that may be some evidence of unauthorized practice, but we cannot answer your question as
a matter of law.
The transaction you describe does implicate other provisions of the Veterinary Licensing Act
as well as other statutes. Pursuant to subsection 23(c) of the act, it is not a violation of the act for
a veterinarian to lease space. Thus, the mere fact that a corporation owns space leased to a
veterinarian does not constitute a violation of the act. However, additional limitations apply if a
veterinarian leases space in a mercantile establishment: "[t]he practice of a veterinarian who leases
space from and practices veterinary medicine on the premises of a mercantile establishment must
be owned by a licensed veterinarian" and "must be under the exclusive control of a licensed
veterinarian." Physical separation between the veterinarian's leased space and the rest of the
commercial space is required.
Section 23 also provides that "[a]ll patient and business records . . are the sole property of
the veterinarian and free from the control of. . . any person not licensed under this Act," although
a veterinarian is not prohibited from entering into a management agreement and permitting
employees or agents of the management company to have access to copies of patient records as
necessary for management functions.2 A corporation that is not owned exclusively by veterinarians
may not own the patient records or business records,"3 nor may it own the drug inventory.'4 Finally,
subsection 2A(b) of article 8890, V.T.C.S., provides in part that "[t]he professional services of a
veterinarian may not be controlled or exploited by any person or entity not licensed under this Act
that intervenes between the client" and the veterinarian." The rest of this subsection makes it very
clear that a veterinarian may not allow an unlicensed person to interfere with his or her practice of
'oSee generally, Rockett, 287 S.W.2d at 191.
"See, e.g., Attorney General Opinions DM-388 (1996) at 4; DM-98 (1992) at 3; M-187 (1968) at 3; 0-2911
(1940) at 2. In some cases, a question of fact may be resolved as a matter of law; see Attorney General Opinions
DM-121 (1992) at 2, 4; JM-1216 (1990) at 2; Letter Opinion No. 92-8 (1992) at 2.
'2V.T.C.S. art. 8890, 23(b).
'1Id.
'4Health & Safety Code 483.041.
5The "client" is the owner or other caretaker of an animal under a veterinarian's care, while the animal is the
"patient." See V.T.C.S. art. 8890, 2A(a)(1).p. 2845
(DM-498)
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This text can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Text.
Texas. Attorney-General's Office. Texas Attorney General Opinion: DM-498, text, December 22, 1998; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth274307/m1/4/: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.