The Texas Board of Chiropractic Examiners (TBCE) are mandated by the Texas legislature to clarify the activities included within the chiropractic practice.
The Texas Medical Assocaition (TMA) and Texas Medical Board (TMB) file a lawsuit against the TBCE for allowing chiropractors to work on patients under anethesia. The lawsuit also challenged Texas chiropractor's ability to provide a diagnosis of any sort to a patient. The case is commonly known as "TMA v. TBCE #1."
Judge Stephen Yelenosky rejected the TMB/TMA's position that chiropractors in Texas should not be allowed to provide any diagnosis to a patient. However, Yelenosky asserted that a diagnosis from a chiropractor should be reserved to "the biomechanical condition of the spine and the musculoskeletal system."
Upon appeal in 2010, a district judge in Texas rules against chiropractic in TMA v. TBCE #1. However, another appeal is launched by TBCE in regards to the EMG/MUA section, and the Texas Chiropractic Association (TCA) appeals all matters to the Third Court of Appeals. Subsequently, the Texas Medical Association files a different lawsuit against the TBCE for allowing chiropractic doctors to perform instrument assisted Vestibular Ocular Nystagmus Testing (VONT).
After the appeal, the courts decide chiropractors can legally diagnose within the Chiropractic Act, however Needle EMG and MUA are ruled invalid.
The Texas Supreme Court rules against the TMA and TMB on their appeal of TMA v. TBCE #1 decision on diagnosis. However, the TMA files an amended petition to the VONT case, and again challenges a chiropractor's ability to render a diagnosis. The case is commonly called "TMA v. TBCE #2B."
The TMA continues its attack against Texas chiropractor's ability to render a diagnosis. The TMA amends the TMA v. TBCE #2B lawsuit, and it becomes known as "TMA v. TBCE #2C." The case is onging, and being heard in court with multiple appeals expected.