{
  "id": 3377120,
  "name": "People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Joseph DeYoung, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. DeYoung",
  "decision_date": "1941-04-15",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 40,560",
  "first_page": "525",
  "last_page": "534",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "309 Ill. App. 525"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "369 Ill. 341",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2565901
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/369/0341-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 690,
    "char_count": 14974,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.503,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.505882454708161e-08,
      "percentile": 0.5211130069745379
    },
    "sha256": "4a1620934929591b7fd584b60e9e6feba1f7a1c84e8a652710ecfaf29f230ceb",
    "simhash": "1:946ed54e534bec79",
    "word_count": 2448
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:28:11.862666+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Joseph DeYoung, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice John J. Sullivan\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThe jury returned a verdict in this case finding the defendant, Joseph DeYoung, guilty of violation of section 24 of the Medical Practice Act (ch. 91, par. 16i, Ill. Rev. Stat. 1937 [Jones Ill. Stats. 79.25]), and the court entered judgment thereon and assessed a fine against him of $125 and $20 costs. This writ of error is brought to review that judgment. In transferring the cause to this court the Supreme Court in People v. DeYoung, 369 Ill. 341, held that no new constitutional question was presented.\nThe information upon which defendant was tried was verified by Charlotte Hermes, an investigator for the Department of Begistration and Education of the State of Illinois.\nThe first count thereof charged that defendant did unlawfully diagnosticate an ailment or supposed ailment of Charlotte Hermes also known as Mrs. Balph Hermann, as asthma.\nThe second count charged that he unlawfully treated \u201cthe supposed asthma of Charlotte Hermes . . . by applying pressure and manipulating the back, side, vertebra and neck of the said Charlotte Hermes . . . with his fingers and hands. \u2019 \u2019\nThe third count charged that the defendant did unlawfully \u201csuggest and recommend the manipulation of the back, side, vertebra and neck of the said Charlotte Hermes . . . with his fingers and hands with the intention of receiving a fee of a portion of $5 in cash therefor.\u201d\nThe fourth count charged that Joseph DeYoung, on November 17, 1936, at the village of Thornton, Cook county, Illinois, not then and there possessing an existing license to practice the treatment of human ailments in any manner, did \u2018 \u2018 unlawfully attach the title Doctor, Physician, Surgeon, M. D., or some other word or abbreviation to his name indicative that he was engaged in the treatment of human ailments as a business, to-wit: . . . did sign his name upon a receipt for $5 in the following manner, to-wit: Joseph DeYoung, D. N., and did distribute pamphlets to members of the public and more particularly to Mrs. Ralph Herman, upon which he had caused or permitted his name to be printed, written or stamped in the following manner: \u2018Dr. Joseph DeYoung, Naprapathic Physician,\u2019 and \u2018Dr. DeYoung,\u2019 and did cause or permit his name to be displayed on the house at 117 Schwab Road, Thornton, Illinois, in the following manner: \u2018Dr. Jos. DeYoung, Naprapath.\u2019 \u201d\nThe fifth count charged that the defendant unlawfully \u201cdid then and there . . . maintain an office in the house at 117 Schwab Road, equipped with a table, chart, equipment and paraphernalia for the treatment of human ailments.\u201d\n\u201cAll in violation of section 24 of an Act to revise the law in relation to the practice of the treatment of human ailments for the better protection of the public health and to prescribe penalties for the violation thereof, and contrary to the statutes in such case made and provided against the peace and dignity of the People of the State of Illinois.\u201d\nThe second count of the information was quashed on defendant\u2019s motion and separate verdicts were returned by the jury finding him not guilty as to the first, third and fifth counts. As heretofore stated it was on the fourth count that the jury returned the verdict of guilty, upon which the judgment before us for review was entered.\nCharlotte Hermes, an investigator for the Department of Registration and Education of the State of Illinois, went to the home of the defendant on November 17, 1936. She saw a sign on his front porch, which read: \u201cDr. Jos. DeYoung, Naprapath.\u201d After entering his home she told him she had a had cold and that she did not know whether it was caused by asthma or hay fever. She asked for and received a napra-pathic treatment. She knew what such a treatment was since she had had one before. This is a manipulative treatment or \u201cglorified\u201d massage. She paid $5 to defendant and he gave her a receipt which read, \u201cReceived of Mrs. Ralph Hermann [the name she used] five dollars for half course of naprapathic treatments. Joseph DeYoung, D.N.\u201d When she left De-Young\u2019s home she took with her three pieces of literature dealing with the value of naprapathic treatments. She testified that DeYoung gave her this literature, advising her to read same so that she might have a clearer understanding of the profession or science of naprapathy. Both DeYoung\u2019 and his wife testified that the literature was not given to Mrs. Hermes but that she purloined it from their home.\nThe literature referred to consisted of three pamphlets. The first of these, entitled \u201cThe Business of Living,\u201d advocates the use of naprapathic treatments for the cure of' almost every conceivable human ailment or disease, enumerating them. This statement is contained therein: \u201cNaprapathy is a scientific method of treating diseases, both chronic and acute, without drugs or surgery. Diseases and ailments which are regarded incurable are cured by this wonderful treatment.\u201d The name of \u201cW. L. Morrison appears in type on the bottom of one of the pages as the author. At the end of the pamphlet are these printed lines: \u201cI have cured others \u2014 why hot you? Telephone or write for appointment. Consultation without charge.\u201d Immediately after the foregoing lines there is written in ink: \u201cDr. DeYoung, Thornton, Illinois, Tel. 2507.\u201d\nThe second pamphlet is entitled, \u201cBulletin of the American Naprapathic Association. Yol. XII, Burlington, Iowa, September, 1936. Number 11.\u201d This bulletin contains articles by various persons as to the efficacy of naprapathic treatments for \u201cChildren\u2019s Respiratory Disorders,\u201d \u201cFaulty Elimination,\u201d \u201cDiseases of the Female,\u201d \u201cRepair Changes in Neurasthenia,\u201d and \u201cProstatitis.\u201d At the top of the front page of the bulletin was stamped: \u201cDr. Joseph DeYoung, Thorton, Ill.\u201d\nThe third pamphlet is entitled \u201cA Personal Message.\u201d At the bottom of the first page thereof in small type is the statement, \u201cCopyrighted 1929 by Chas. R. Cushman.\u201d At the end of this printed circular appears the following in heavy black type: \u201cDr. Joseph DeYoung Naprapathic Physician, Pipestone, Minnesota.\u201d A black ink line is run through \u201cPipestone, Minnesota,\u201d and \u201cThornton, Ill.\u201d is written thereunder in ink. This pamphlet contains the following, among other questions and answers:\n\u201cWhat diseases are treated by Naprapathy?\n\u201cConnective tissue diseases, to answer the question briefly. But speaking of \u2018diseases\u2019 as you know them (we call them sympto\u2019-ras), the following, among others, have been successfully treated: Stomach troubles, headache, hay fever, neuralgia, asthma, bronchitis, liver complaints, kidney and bladder trouble, constipation, enlarged or inflamed tonsils, insomnia, ovarion and womb disorders, lumbago, rheumatism, neuritis, gall-stones, foot troubles, nervousness, influenza, paralysis, troubles of the nose, throat, ears and eyes, including cataract; jaundice, piles, heart troubles, consumption, deafness, prolapsus or falling of the abdominal or pelvic organs, goitre, etc., etc.\u201d\nDefendant contends that his motion to quash the fourth count of the information should have been sustained on the ground that it stated no offense in that it failed to charge that he was in fact engaged in treating human ailments. There is no merit in this contention. It is agreed that the word \u201cindicative\u201d in that section of the statute upon which the fourth count was based means to \u201chint\u201d or to \u201csuggest.\u201d The violation charged under the fourth count is not that defendant treated Charlotte Hermes or diagnosed her condition as asthma or maintained an office at 117 Schwab road, Thornton, Illinois, equipped for the treatment of human ailments, but that by attaching to his name one or more of the titles specified in the statute in the manner alleged, he indicated, hinted or suggested that he was engaged in the treatment of human ailments as a business. That portion of section 24 of the Medical Practice Act upon which the fourth count is predicated is clear and definite and distinctly states a crime. It does not contain any declaration of what shall be conclusive evidence of a fact and it does not deny a fair opportunity for rebuttal. This statute provides: \u201cIf any person . . . shall attach the title Doctor, Physician ... 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.\u201d This is not a declaration that the mere attaching of the title \u201cDoctor\u201d or any of the other titles enumerated in itself established that the person charged was engaged in the treatment of human ailments as a business, but rather that the title or abbreviation must be attached and used in a manner and under such circumstances as to indicate, hint or suggest that such person is engaged in the treatment of human ailments as a business. The fourth count of the information clearly and specifically informed the defendant of the acts with which he was charged, among which was the distribution of pamphlets \u201cto the members of the public and more particularly to Mrs. Ralph Hermann . . . upon which he had caused or permitted his name to be printed, written or stamped in the following manner: Dr, Joseph DeYoung, Naprapathic Physician and Dr. De-Young.\u201d We think the fourth count stated an offense under the statute and that defendant\u2019s motion to quash same was properly overruled.\nThe next question presented is whether it was shown by the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant attached to his name the title \u201cDoctor\u201d or \u201cPhysician\u201d or the abbreviation \u201cDr.\u201d in such a manner as to indicate that he was engaged in the treatment of human ailments as a business.\nThere is no requirement in this State that one engaged in the business of administering massage treatments be licensed. Defendant presented evidence to the effect that naprapathy is merely massage of a particular type, that the titles \u201cDoctor\u201d and \u201cSurgeon\u201d may be properly used outside of the field of medicine and that the defendant had a degree as a \u201cDoctor of Naprapathy.\u201d But these matters were all beside the question which the jury was called upon to determine under the fourth count. That question was whether the defendant attached to his name any of the titles specified in the statute in such a manner or under such circumstances as to indicate, hint or suggest that he was engaged in the treatment of human ailments as a business.\nEliminating from consideration the sign on defendant\u2019s front porch and the receipt given to Mrs. Hermes by DeYoung as possibly not tending to prove the allegations of the fourth count, we turn to the literature heretofore described and set forth in part.\nWhat significance has this literature which Mrs. Hermes took with her from defendant\u2019s home? It was clearly a question of fact for the jury to determine whether she was given this literature by defendant or whether she took same from his home surreptitiously and without his knowledge. By its verdict the jury found that he gave it to her. While defendant was not the author of these pamphlets, he placed his stamp of approval on their contents and adopted the statements contained therein as his own when he wrote \u201cDr. DeYoung, Thornton, Illinois, Tel. 2507,\u201d on the booklet entitled \u201cThe Business of Living\u2019.\u201d 'Here he used the abbreviation \u201cDr.\u201d without any qualification whatsoever. As to the pamphlet entitled \u201cBulletin of the American Naprapathic Association. Vol. XII, Burlington, Iowa, September, 1936. Number 11,\u201d there is stamped across the top of the cover page: \u201cDr. DeYoung, Thornton, Illinois.\u201d Again the abbreviation \u201c Dr. \u201d is used without qualification. As has been noted the third pamphlet is headed \u201cA Personal Message.\u201d At the end thereof there appeared in heavy type: \u201cDr. Joseph DeYoung, Naprapathic Physician, Pipestone, Minnesota.\u201d A black ink line was run through \u201cPipe-stone, Minnesota,\u201d and \u201cThornton, Ill.\u201d was written thereunder in ink. It will be observed that in this instance the word \u201cPhysician\u201d was used. In Webster\u2019s, New International Dictionary, 2nd Edition, a physician is defined as \u201ca person skilled in physics or the art of healing; one duly authorized to treat diseases, esp. by medicines; a Doctor of Medicine; often distinguished from a surgeon. \u2019 \u2019 Defendant as a naprapath had no right under the law to attach the title \u201cPhysician\u201d to his name.\nFrom the tenor and contents of these pamphlets as heretofore set forth, it appears conclusively that defendant indicated that he was engaged in the treatment of human ailments as a business. The concluding paragraph of the pamphlet entitled \u201cThe Business of Living\u201d states: \u201cNaprapathy is a scientific method of treating diseases, both chronic and acute, without drugs or surgery. Diseases and ailments which are regarded as uncurable are cured by this wonderful treatment.\u201d By attaching to his name as written on this printed pamphlet the title \u201cDr.,\u201d defendant not only indicated, hinted and suggested that he was engaged in the treatment of human ailments as a business, but he definitely held himself out as being so engaged. The same is true as to the other two pamphlets upon which he attached to his name the title \u201cPhysician\u201d and the abbreviation \u201cDr.\u201d In our opinion the offense charged in the fourth count of the information was proven beyond a reasonable doubt.\nDefendant complains of the refusal of the trial court to give certain instructions tendered by him and of its modification of another instruction. We have carefully examined these instructions and find that the instruction last above referred to was properly modified and that the other instructions were properly refused. The jury was fully and fairly instructed as to the applicable rules of law.\nThere is no merit in defendant\u2019s contention that the verdict of guilty as to the fourth count of the information is repugnant to the verdicts of not guilty on the other counts and that it is therefore a nullity. The specific charge made against defendant in the fourth count is separate and distinct from the charges made in the other counts and the verdict of guilty as to this count is entirely consistent with his acquittal on the other counts.\nThis case has been fairly tried and no adequate reason has been presented for disturbing the verdict or judgment. The judgment of the County court is affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.\nFriend, P. J., and Scanlan, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice John J. Sullivan"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "James J. Barbour, of Evanston, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Otto Kerner, Attorney General, for defendant in error; A. B. Dennis, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas J. Courtney, State\u2019s Attorney, Edward E. Wilson, John T. Gallagher, Blair L. Varnes and Melvin S. Rembe, Assistant State\u2019s Attorneys, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Joseph DeYoung, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 40,560.\nOpinion filed April 15, 1941.\nJames J. Barbour, of Evanston, for plaintiff in error.\nOtto Kerner, Attorney General, for defendant in error; A. B. Dennis, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas J. Courtney, State\u2019s Attorney, Edward E. Wilson, John T. Gallagher, Blair L. Varnes and Melvin S. Rembe, Assistant State\u2019s Attorneys, of counsel."
  },
  "file_name": "0525-01",
  "first_page_order": 581,
  "last_page_order": 590
}