Watson v. Centro Espanol De Tampa

• Decision Date: 29 April 1947
• Citation: 158 Fla. 796,30 So.2d 288
• Parties: WATSON, Atty. Gen., et al. v. CENTRO ESPANOL DE TAMPA et al.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

30 So.2d 288

158 Fla. 796

WATSON, Atty. Gen., et al. v. CENTRO ESPANOL DE TAMPA et al.

Florida Supreme Court

April 29, 1947

Rehearing Denied May 20, 1947.

J. Tom Watson, Atty. Gen., Fred M. Burns and Bolling G Stanley, Asst. Attys. Gen., and J. Rex Farrior, State Atty. Luther W. Cobbey, County Sol., and Charles H. Ross, Asst County Sol., all of Tampa, for petitioners.

Ralph A. Marsicano and Whitaker Brothers, all of Tampa, for respondents.

TERRELL, Justice.

The County Solicitor of Hillsborough County filed an information against Don Carlos Gubern Y Puig charging him with the violation of Chapter 458, Florida Statutes 1941, F.S.A., defining and punishing as a felony the practice of medicine without a license. Gubern and the other respondents then filed a petition in the Circuit Court, praying for declaratory decree construing certain provisions of Chapter 458, adjudicating the rights, privileges, and immunities of petitioners thereunder, and for temporary injunction restraining the county solicitor from trying Gubern on the information pending the disposition of the petition for declaratory decree. A motion to dismiss the petition was overruled, a temporary restraining order was granted as prayed for, and that order is here for review on certiorari.

The question for determination is impressed with a dual aspect and will be stated as follows: Gubern was informed against for violating Section 458.15, Florida Statutes 1941, F.S.A. He promptly petitioned the court for declaratory decree adjudicating his rights, status and immunities under Chapter 458, and for temporary restraining order pending such adjudication. Query: (1) Under the facts stated, was the court authorized to entertain a petition for declaratory decree adjudicating the rights of petitioner under the provisions of Chapter 458, and (2) If the trial Court is authorized to entertain such a petition, may he then grant a temporary restraining order staying the prosecution of the criminal charge, pending the disposition of the petition for declaratory decree?

The essential facts set out in the petition are that Dr. M. R. Winton is the Medical Director of Centro Espanol de Tampa, a non-profit corporation under the laws of Florida, which has about 9000 subscribers, most of whom are of Latin descent and pay regular dues, that for more than fifty years said corporation has maintained a hospital and furnished medical, surgical and hospitalization services for its subscribers, and, that in order adequately to furnish such services, it is necessary to employ nonlicensed assistants as interns to aid the Medical Director. It is alleged that a like practice prevails in the Tampa municipal and other hospitals throughout the State.

The petition also shows the filing of the information against Gubern, charging him with practicing medicine without a license, that he does not attempt to practice medicine except as an assistant or intern in the conduct of Centro Espanol de Tempa under the direction of Dr. Winton or Dr. Robles, who is also employed in said hospital, that the duties of an intern are somewhat ambiguous under the laws of Florida, but that services similar to that being rendered by Gubern are being performed by interns in other hospitals throughout the State and have been for many years.

It is also shown that Gubern is a graduate of an outstanding medical college, has been duly licensed and has in fact practiced medicine outside the State for many years, that he is in every way qualified to practice medicine except that he has not been licensed by the State Medical Board of Florida. That the rights of Gubern, the Medical Director of Centro Espanol de Tampa, and the hospital have been drawn in question by the information filed against Gubern, and that they are entitled to a decree adjudicating their rights, privileges and immunities under the law.

We first dispose of the point of the whether or not the chancellor committed error in staying the trial of the criminal charge against Gubern, pending the determination of his rights and status under Sections 458.13 and 458.15 and other sections of Chapter 458, Florida Statutes 1941, F.S.A.

The basis for the information is that Gubern is practicing medicine contrary to the provisions of Chapter 458, Florida Statutes 1941, F.S.A. If he is not violating this act, then there is nothing to support the information. It cannot be said that as to Gubern the act is unambiguous. Since this is the case, and one of the purposes of Chapter 21820, Acts 1943, F.S.A. § 87.01 et seq. (Declaratory Judgments Act) is to determine personal and property rights and status when in doubt, there must be sufficient reason to invoke it here. This thesis would seem to be all the more true when the aid that Gubern is now charged with as being in violation of the law, has been a common practice in this State for many years.

The real question on this point is whether or not the chancellor had the discretion to stay the trial of the criminal charge for a brief period till Gubern's status could be determined. Whether the action for declaratory judgment should be permitted to interrupt the trial of the criminal charge is not before us. Unless there was an abuse of discretion in staying the trial for a limited period for this purpose, there was no abuse of discretion. Ostrander v. Linn, Iowa, 22 N.W.2d 223.

It is quite true that equity cannot ordinarily be invoked to enjoin the prosecution of a crime, but the rule is equally as well settled that equitable jurisdiction may be invoked to restrain criminal prosecutions under unconstitutional acts when essential to safeguard gersonal or property rights. The right to earn a livelihood and to continue in one's employment unmolested by efforts to impose void enactments should likewise be entitled to protection. Truax v. Raich, 239 U.S. 33, 36 S.Ct. 7, 60 L.Ed. 131, L.R.A. 1916D, 545, Ann.Cas.1917B, 283; Terrace v. Thompson, 263 U.S. 197, 44 S.Ct. 15, 68 L.Ed. 255; Packard v. Banton, 264 U.S. 140, 44 S.Ct. 257, 68 L.Ed. 596.

It is not disputed that for many years Centro Espanol de Tampa and other hospitals in the State employ interns to assist the staff and no question has before...