People v. Lee Wah
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMyrick, J.
The defendant was accused of a misdemeanor in that he did willfully and unlawfully engage in the practice of medicine without having procured a certificate as provided by the act of April 3, 1876 (Statutes *811875-76, p. 792), and the act of April 1, 1878 (Statutes 1877-78, p. 918).
The uncontradicted facts are, that the defendant had a place of business in San José, at which he kept herbs. Two women (called as witnesses for the prosecution) went to his place of business, stated to him their ailments, and asked if he could give them herbs to effect cure; he said he could; he prepared herbs of…
2Cited by11 opinions
- San Christina Investment Co. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- People v. Boo Doo HongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Colby v. SchwartzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- Bell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1911
- Burr v. City & Cty. of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.