In re Donaghy
| Decision Date | 21 May 1946 |
| Docket Number | No. 29065.,29065. |
| Citation | 66 N.E.2d 856,393 Ill. 621 |
| Parties | In re DONAGHY. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Disciplinary proceedings in the matter of V. Russell Donaghy, attorney, where the committee of grievances of the Chicago Bar Association, acting as commissioners, recommended suspension for a period of three years.
Order of submission set aside; cause rereferred.
Charles Leviton, of Chicago, amicus curiae.
Vogel & Bunge and David A. Schallman, all of Chicago, for respondent.
On complaints against the conduct of respondent, the Committee on Grievances of the Chicago Bar Association, acting as commissioners, has recommended his suspension for a period of three years. Several grounds of complaint were filed but the recommendation of the commissioners is based upon two charges of what is commonly known as ‘ambulance chasing.’ One had to do with the procurement of the case of Effie Eveland through the assistance of the Swedish Covenant Hospital, and the other charged the employment of one Albert L. McAfee as a ‘runner’ or ‘ambulance chaser.’
Much testimony was taken. There is much confusion in the record. The parties have treated the first two volumes of the record as in lieu of a completed abstract, with the result that the work of this court has been greatly increased and the record badly confused.
Concerning the case of Effie Eveland, the complaint charges that on the occasion of her being injured and taken to the Swedish Covenant Hospital, she, through her employer, selected an attorney to handle legal matters pertaining to her case. After a few days her employer and this attorney were denied permission to see her. Thereafter an employee of the hospital told her that she should employ respondent and if she refused to do so she would have to leave the hospital. It is charged that this was also communicated to Effie Eveland's father, who employed respondent to avoid having his daughter moved.
The other basis for the commissioners' recommendation is the charge that respondent employed Albert L. McAfee as solicitor of business or ‘ambulance chaser’ and that as result of that employment McAfee secured various cases for respondent. This charge rests almost entirely on the evidence of McAfee.
Respondent has filed objections to the report and recommendation of the commissioners and urges that Rule 59 of this court, Ill.Rev.Stat.1945, c. 110, s 259.59, under which the hearings were had, constitutes an illegal delegation of judicial power and that respondent was denied due process of law by reason of the denial of certain petitions for the issuance of writs of dedimus potestatem to take evidence. He also contends that the findings and recommendations of the commissioners are not supported by the evidence.
Respondent, in support of his contention that Rule 59 authorized an illegal delegation of judicial power, argues that the proceedings were carried on before a subcommittee appointed by officers of the Chicago Bar Association without order or direction of this court. This contention was urged in In re McCallum, 391 Ill. 400, 64 N.E.2d 310, where it is pointed out that the recommendations are purely advisory, that the court acts only after an examination of the evidence in the case, and that where no answer is made by the respondent the supporting...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Heirich, In re
...or to reopen the record. On respondent's objections, all these motions were denied by the majority, even though the case of In re Donaghy, 393 Ill. 621, 66 N.E.2d 856, offered ample authority for a re-reference of this case to commissioners of this court to reopen the hearing for the purpos......
-
Trask, In re
...power to the commissioners under the rule. In re Platz, 60 Nev. 296, 108 P.2d 858; Phipps v. Wilson, 7 Cir., 186 F.2d 748; In re Donaghy, 393 Ill. 621, 66 N.E.2d 856. The procedure prescribed by rule 16 is very practical. Proceedings under the new rule are much more convenient to the court ......
-
Phipps v. Wilson, 10248.
...has held that the procedure under Chapter 110, § 259.59, Rule 59, is not an unconstitutional delegation of judicial power. In re Donaghy, 393 Ill. 621, 66 N.E.2d 856. It has also held that this section gives the commissioners a wide discretion as to procedure to be followed in disbarment ca......
-
Damisch, In re
... ... The principal argument presented is that the evidence in support of the complaint is insufficient to establish solicitation, citing our decisions holding the complaint of misconduct similar to an indictment in that respondent is presumed innocent until proved guilty (In re Donaghy, 393 Ill. 621, 66 N.E.2d 856) and that the evidence should be resolved upon a theory of innocence where reasonably possible to do so (People v. Bentley, 357 Ill. 82, 191 N.E. 230). There is no doubt that [38 Ill.2d 207] such is and should be the rule, but neiher the Commissioners nor this court ... ...