The applicant College sought an order enjoining the respondent from providing anesthesia-free dog teeth cleaning services, arguing it constituted the unlicensed practice of veterinary medicine.
The court found that the cosmetic cleaning of dog teeth without anesthesia did not constitute the practice of veterinary dentistry.
However, the court concluded that the respondent's website and advertising held her out as providing veterinary services by implying health benefits and an ability to advise on oral care.
The court granted an injunction prohibiting the respondent from holding herself out as capable of diagnosing or treating canine oral health conditions.
