Evening star., 1939-03-27
Medical Case
Arguments Set
For April II
Antitrust Battle
Gets to Actual Issue
After Long Skirmish

:
April II has been set as the date
for arguments in the next important
battle in the antitrust medical case
before Justice James M. Proctor in
District Court.
On that day. counsel for four Or
ganizations of doctors and 81 indi-
vidual defendants of this city and
Chicago will present to the court
argument on their demurrer to the
- indictment charging violation Of
the Sherman Antitrust Act.
The Department of Justice
through its special assistants to the
Attorney General will uphold the
indictments.
Thus the noted medical case,
which already has progressed
through several preliminary skir-
mishes. will reach actual issues.
The defendants are divided into
two groups. The first includes the
four organizations of doctors and 81
defendants, while the second in
cludeS one defendant, DR.. Prentiss
Wilson, who already has filed his
demurrer through counsel, John
Laskey Counsel for the group in
Cludes Edward M. Burke of Chicago,
Seth w. Richardson. Charles S.
Baker and William E. Leahy Of this
city.
Doctors Deny Trade Clause.
The other demurrer already has
been presented to the Department
of Justice and outlines five points,
to support the defendants conten-
ton that they are not guilty of vio-
lating the Sherman Antitrust Act.
The Indictment. returned some time
ago by Federal grand jury, charges
the defendants with combination
and conspiracy in restraint of trade
through their activities against
Group Health Associates. Inc, med
ical cooperative of Government
workers here.
The defendants charge that the
indictment does not allege facts
sufficient in law to constitute any
offense within the provisions OF
section 3 of the Sherman Act.
All OF the acts charged against
the defendants by the indictment
are said by the demurrer to be in
Volved in and part of the practice
OF the learned profession of the de-
PENDANTS and as such are not trade
or commerce. under the act.
Charging that the averments of
the indictment are too general,
vague, indefinite and uncertain to
Inform the defendants of the nature
and cause of the accusation against
them the demurrer further
declares that the defendants are
therefore unable to make their de-
fense...-l Therefore, the Indictment,
they claim, deprives the doctors of
liberty and property without due
process Of law contrary to the Fifth
Amendment to the Constitution and
also fails to inform the defendants
OF the nature and cause of the
accusation against them as required
by the Sixth Amendment.
Sherman Law Hit.
The defendants charge the
criminal provisions of Section 3 of
the Sherman Act are so broad, un-
limited. vague, uncertain and in
definite as to constitute themselves
violation of the sixth amendment.
Furthermore, it is charged that
these criminal provisions of the act
Illegally delegate legislative power to
the executive and judicial branches
OF the government in violation of
Article l, Section l of the Con-
stitution.
The demurrer also quotes a gen.
eral charge that "the indictment is
bad in substance for other reasons
apparent on the face thereof"
Among the Is details listed under
the claim that the indictment did
not allege sufficient facts to con-
stitute an offense, the demurrer
claims that the practice of medicine
is not trade or commerce within the
meaning of Section 3 of the Sherman
Act, nor can the alleged business
OF Group Health Association. Inc,
nor the alleged business of Wash
lngton hospitals be considered trade
or commerce under the act.
The defendants also charge that
Group Health Association, Inc, is
unlawful under the Medical Prac-
tices Act and also unlawful as IAN
unauthorized operation of an insur-
ance company.
These contentious against Group
Health Association are made despite
the fact that a decision in District
Court has held that Group Health
Association is legal. Further litiga-
ton on this point, however, is pend
ing.