Granger v. Adson
| Decision Date | 03 November 1933 |
| Docket Number | 29,476 |
| Citation | 250 N.W. 722,190 Minn. 23 |
| Parties | JOHN GRANGER v. A. W. ADSON AND OTHERS (STATE BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS) |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Action in the district court for Hennepin county to enjoin defendant state board of medical examiners and the members thereof from interfering with the conduct of plaintiff's business referred to in his complaint as a health audit service, which consists of the furnishing to subscribers, under a contract which plaintiff had with one Dr. Grave, of periodical urinalyses and blood pressure tests. Defendants demurred to the complaint, the demurrer was sustained, Frank E. Reed Judge, and plaintiff appealed. Affirmed.
Physician and surgeon -- unlawful practice.
1. The plaintiff, a layman, in conducting a "health audit" for a fee for which he furnished his subscribers with the results of urinalyses and blood pressure tests and either himself advised, or passed on to the subscriber advice from the pathologist who made the urinalyses, as to whether the results showed a normal or abnormal state of health and whether the subscriber should see a physician, in some cases advising as to diet, exercise, and habits, was practicing medicine unlawfully in violation of 1 Mason Minn. St. 1927, § 5717.
Physician and surgeon -- unlawful practice.
2. In so doing he is practicing the science of healing in violation of 1 Mason Minn. St. 1927, § 5705-1, which defines the science as including the diagnosis or analysis of the condition of human health.
Physician and surgeon -- unlawful practice.
3. Plaintiff's contract with his pathologist was illegal and in violation of statute and the public policy of the state.
Thompson, Hessian & Fletcher and Carleton F. Boeke, for appellant.
Harry H. Peterson, Attorney General, and F. Manley Brist, Special Assistant Attorney General, for respondents.
This is an appeal from an order sustaining a demurrer to plaintiff's complaint in an action to enjoin the defendants from interfering with a contract which plaintiff had with a Dr. Grave. The complaint alleges that plaintiff, who is a layman, conducts what is termed a "health audit" in the city of Minneapolis. For a fee of ten dollars per year he contracts with his "subscribers" to furnish four urinalyses and a blood pressure test each year. The urine samples are sent in by mail as a general rule, and plaintiff then turns them over to Dr. Grave, a pathologist with whom he has a contract to furnish the results of the analyses to him. According to the plaintiff, if an analysis shows serious abnormal condition he advises his subscriber to consult a competent physician; but if the abnormality is slight he advises him in regard to proper diet, habits, and exercise should the report of Dr. Grave advise such. Plaintiff's complaint specifically denies that he is practicing medicine or that the conduct of a health audit business consists of the practice of medicine. The defendants, who comprise the state board of medical examiners, advised Dr. Grave that plaintiff was engaged in the practice of medicine contrary to the laws of the state of Minnesota and at once to desist from making urinalyses for the plaintiff on the ground that it was illegal for Dr. Grave to furnish plaintiff with the results thereof for the benefit of the plaintiff's subscribers. He accordingly desisted, and this action followed.
1. It is the contention of respondents that Granger was engaged in the practice of medicine contrary to the provisions of 1 Mason Minn. St. 1927, § 5717, and that he was engaged in the practice of healing as defined by the basic science law, 1 Mason Minn. St. 1927, § 5705-1. It is alleged in the complaint:
In our opinion, advising the subscriber for a fee as to certain improved habits of diet, exercise, or living, although not accompanied by any medical prescription or treatment, is a violation of § 5717. State v. Edmunds, 127 Iowa 333, 101 N.W. 431; Heintze v. State Board, 107 N.J.L. 420, 153 A. 253. Diet, exercise, and mode of living are agencies for the relief of disease; indeed, they are the only known relief or treatment of some diseases. It further appears that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial