New Britain herald., 1927-08-30
four ECLECTICS
WIN APPEALS IN
SUPERIOR court
DR.. James ". Bush One Of Those
Who Is EXonerated Of
Fraudulent Practice
FIFTEEN OTHER CASES
DISMISSED BY DECISION

Rulings by Judges Brown and Simp-
son Declare That I'm Several In
stances Graduates of st. Louis
College Had Full knowledge of
Fraud Which Was Being Prac.
ticed.
New Haven, Aug. 80 P-Four of
the u appeals OF eclectic physicians
from the revocation of their licenses
to practice by the state department
of health were sustained in decisions
hled in superior court here today
by the two judges who recently
heard the cases. Fifteen of the re-
naming were dismissed because of
fraud.
One of the other two appellante
had no right to have his license re-
stored, the court held, because q
year and eight months had elapsed
between the time he surrendered his
license and the time he brought ac-
ton, while the second who had not
filed formal pleading at the time
of the trial had no decision made
in his case.
Fraud is Concluded
Concluding that there was frau
on the part of the st. Louis college,
from which the appellants gradual
\ &c I'D
knowledge of the same and were
guilty of fraud in connection with
their admission and education there
and also among other acts in OBJ
tanning their certificates from this
state pursuant to their examination
before the eclectic board" Judge
Brown dismissed the appeals of An
thony K. Campo, Modestino Cop
ptla, William H. Feldman, William
Levy and f. a. Mower.
In the case of Samuel Lerner,
Judge Brown says that if the formal
pleading which had not been filed at
the time of the trial has not yet
been filed, it should be done forth
with. Frank b. Gavlas, in the opin-
ion OF Judge Brown. set forth In a
second decision filed today "cffec-
lively surrendered and abandoned
his license when he gave it up on
January 80, 1924, and did not at
tempt to regain it until legal action
was brought one year and eight
months later" and has no right TO
have 1t restored"
Bush Is EHoncrated
Judge Ernest C. Simpson. who
heard the appeals of IA other eclec-
tics in his decision also filed today
sustained the appeals of Julius +.
karp, Ralph l.. Long, James W..
Bush of New Britain, and Allie J.
Goodwin. In regard to the first
three, the judge says that he was
unable to find any fraudulent prac-
tice by or inputable to these appel
lants."
The application of Mr.. Goodwin
who applied for examination for
license by reciprocity, is sustained
because Judge Simpson was salts
fed he was acting in good faith and
without any intention to deceive
10 Others Dismissed
The appeals OF Samuel Slabotsky.
Samuel Posner. David x. Aaronson,
James Bockman. Roy A. Long, A. e.
s. Won Sasenhofen, w. ID. Mac
Cormack Raymond c. Prisque,
Michael NJ. J'Anthony and Aurelius
r. Deianis were dismissed by Judge
Simpson because of certain frauds
on the part of the appellants
Judge Browns memorandum OF
decision in the case of Gavlas fol-
lows: by this proceeding the
plaintiff seeks to have this court de-
cree that the defendants shall rein
state and restore a license or GER
tificate of registration originally
issued to him to practice medicine
in this state as an eclectic physician
and surgeon. which license he sur
rendered to the grand jury of Hart
ford county on January 80. 1924,
during its investigation of the alleg-
ed fraudulent practice of obeyins
such licenses through the defendant
eclectic board.
1.-THE only question of fact upon
the evidence is as to whether the
plaintiff voluntarily SO surrendered
his said license. ] find that he did,
with the full intent to surrender and
abandon it for all time, and that
he thereafter did nothing to indicate
a change Of intent, or to attempt to
regain his license, until this practice
was brought September 80, 1925,
one year and eight months later.
Il therefore conclude that the
plaintiff effectively surrendered and
abandoned his license. and has no
right to have it restored.
But, in any event. his laches
should bar the plaintiff from the re-
lief sought in this equitable pro-
ceeding. And 1t is neither within
the terms of the statute 1850, pro-
viding for an appeal from the re-
vocation of such a certificate, nor
brought within the time limited
thereby. Since fair Interpretation
OF Chapter IS of 1925. relied upon
by the plaintiff, indicates that the
effect thereof is limited to practice
medicine based upon revocations
made pursuant to 1852 this act
doc. not affect the conclusions In
.h!s practice above stated.
'".'h,E Is no. Il rcplcvin action at
law, nor has The plaintiff brought
any such. II the claim Of plaintiffs
counsel made in argument that
nothing In ths law makes it ircum-
bent upon doctor to keep his