MD Chiro Juris study materials
MD Chiro Juris study resources

MD Chiro Juris: Maryland Chiropractic Statutes and Regulations (COMAR Title 10.43)

MD Chiro Juris · Work through your exam, one topic at a time.

All guide sections

Maryland Chiropractic Statutes and Regulations (COMAR Title 10.43)

Where the law lives

Maryland chiropractic practice sits on two layers that the jurisprudence exam always tests together. The statute is the Maryland Chiropractic Act in the Health Occupations Article, Title 3: it creates the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners, defines "chiropractic," sets licensure qualifications, and lists the grounds on which a license may be disciplined. The regulations are COMAR Title 10.43, adopted by the Board to carry the statute into operation: applications, examinations, continuing education, practice standards, fees, and hearing mechanics.

A third layer -- Board newsletters, FAQs, and letters -- is interpretive only. It shows how the Board reads a rule, but it does not carry the force of law the way COMAR does.

How to resolve a compliance question

  1. Read the statute first. If the Act forbids something, no regulation or Board policy can authorize it.
  2. Read COMAR 10.43 next. Regulations bind licensees, but a regulation that exceeds the statute is invalid.
  3. Only then consult Board guidance.

Contested cases follow the Administrative Procedure Act (State Government Article Title 10); hearings are typically held at the Office of Administrative Hearings, with judicial review to the circuit court.

Worked example

A colleague argues: "COMAR lists adjunctive procedures, so anything a physician can do is fair game." That reasoning fails on hierarchy. "Adjunctive" takes its meaning from the statutory definition of chiropractic; the Board cannot enlarge the legislature's scope by regulation. The procedure is in scope only if it falls inside the Act as implemented, and the burden is on the licensee to show that.

Traps that cost marks

  • Treating a Board FAQ as if it were a regulation.
  • Importing another state's scope: "I did this in Florida" is no defense for care delivered in Maryland.
  • Forgetting the Board's power is licensure-based, not criminal prosecution.
  • Quoting an outdated COMAR section; the version in effect at the time of the conduct controls.