People v. Young
| Decision Date | 05 October 1938 |
| Docket Number | No. 24649.,24649. |
| Citation | 16 N.E.2d 729,369 Ill. 341 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. DE YOUNG. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Cook County Court; Albert E. Isley, Judge.
Joseph De Young was convicted for attaching the title of Doctor, Physician, Surgeon, M. D., or other word or abbreviation to his name, indicative of the fact that he was engaged in the treatment of human ailments as a business, without possessing a license to practice medicine, and he brings error.
Cause transferred to the Appellate Court for the First District.James J. Barbour, of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.
Otto Kerner, Atty. Gen., Thomas J. Courtney, State's Atty., of Chicago, and A. B. Dennis, of Danville (Edward E. Wilson, John T. Gallagher, Blair L. Varnes, and Melvin S. Rembe, all of Chicago, of counsel), for the People.
The defendant, Joseph DeYoung, was found guilty in the county court of Cook county of violating the Medical Practiceact, Ill.Rev.Stat.1937, c. 91, § 1 et seq., and fined $125 and costs. The information was based upon section 24 of the act which provides: ‘If any person shall hold himself out to the public as being engaged in the diagnosis or treatment of ailments of human beings; or shall suggest, recommend or prescribe any form of treatment for the palliation, relief or cure of any physical or mental ailment of any person with the intention of receiving therefor, either directly or indirectly, any fee, gift, or compensation whatsoever; or shall diagnosticate or attempt to diagnosticate, operate upon, profess to heal, prescribe for, or otherwise treat any ailment, or supposed ailment, of another; or shall maintain an office for examination or treatment of persons afflicted, or alleged or supposed to be afflicted, by any ailment; or shall attach the title Doctor, Physician, Surgeon, M.D., or any other word or abbreviation to his name, indicative that he is engaged in the treatment of human ailments as a business; and shall not then possess in full force and virtue a valid license issued by the authority of this State to practice the treatment of human ailments in any manner, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars nor more than five hundred dollars, or by donfinement in the county jail not more than one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.’ Ill.Rev.Stat.1937, chap. 91, § 16i, p. 2002. There were five counts to the information on three of which the defendant was found not guilty. The fourth count, upon which the verdict was based, charged that the defendant, not possessing a license to practice the treatment of human ailments in any manner, did unlawfully attach the title of Doctor, Physician, Surgeon, M.D. or any other word or abbreviation to his name indicative of the fact that he was engaged in the treatment of human ailments as a business. A writ of error was sued out of this court on the ground that a constitutional question was involved, in that the portion of section 24 of the Medical Practice act, making it an offense for one not licensed to practice medicine, to attach the word Doctor, Physician or other abbreviation to his name indicative that he was engaged in the practice of human ailments as a business, was arbitrary and unreasonable, and was violative of due process under the provisions of the Federal and State...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- People v. Handzik
- Lutkus v. Dep't of Finance
- McKinley v. City of Chicago
-
Grutzius v. Armour & Co. of Delaware, Inc.
...the asserted constitutional question is, in fact, reasonably involved. Hawley Products Co. v. May, Ill., 37 N.E.2d 167;People v. DeYoung, 369 Ill. 341, 16 N.E.2d 729;Hawkins v. Hawkins, 350 Ill. 227, 183 N.E. 9. Nor is it sufficient to confer direct jurisdiction for a pleading, as here, to ......