Dr. David R. Baird, Dr. George D. Grice, Dr. Michael Lampkin, and Dr. Jay B. Robards, Appellants v. Charleston…

Summary

The court affirmed dismissal of the doctors' claim that the bond issuance aided the unlawful practice of medicine, but reversed the trial court's dismissal or summary judgment on the remaining claims. It held that the doctors had standing based on the substantial public interest involved, were not required to satisfy the statutory prerequisites applicable to suits affecting state obligations, and were entitled to litigate factual issues concerning a council member's conflict and the bond recipient's statutory status. The court also held that the trial court improperly converted the Rule 12(b)(6) motions into summary judgment motions without adequate notice.