Bailey v. Mogg
New York Supreme Court
Error to the Onondaga common pleas. Bailey sued Mogg in a justice’s court and recovered judgment, which was reversed by the common pleas on certiorari; and this writ of error is brought to review the last mentioned judgment.. The question is sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Beardsley, J.
This action was brought in 1845, to recover a compensation for medical attendance and medicines furnished and administered by the plaintiff, as a botanic physician in 1840. The plaintiff was not licensed to practice medicine, and the only question is, whether such an action could be sustained.
Since the passage of the act of 1844, quackery may certainly boast its triumphant and complete establishment by law. But notwithstanding this, a brief retrospect of the course of legislation on this subject, may not only be useful, but is to some extent necessary in deciding…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Eastman v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
- White v. . CarrollNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
- Goldfarb v. GoldfarbAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
- Graham v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
- Government of French Republic v. CabotNew York Supreme Court · 1947