Society of New York Neurologists, Inc. v. Adelphi University, 18 N.Y.2d 370, 218 N.E.2d 373, 275 N.Y.S.2d 511 (1966)
A private organization generally lacks standing to sue to enjoin the unauthorized practice of a profession when the state has established a comprehensive statutory scheme for licensing, regulation, and enforcement, unless the organization demonstrates special damages distinct from the general public.
Summary
A society of neurologists and psychiatrists sued Adelphi University and one of its employees, alleging they were illegally teaching and practicing medicine without a license. The plaintiffs sought an injunction to stop the university’s psychoanalytic program and the employee’s alleged practice of medicine. The lower courts dismissed the suit, finding the society lacked standing because New York’s Education Law provides a comprehensive scheme for regulating medical practice, with enforcement primarily the responsibility of the Attorney General and the Department of Education. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the society, absent special damages, could not maintain the action.
Facts
The Society of New York Neurologists, Inc., representing physicians specializing in neurology and psychiatry in Nassau County, filed suit against Adelphi University and Goldman, an Adelphi employee. The society alleged that Adelphi, which did not include a recognized medical school, and Goldman, who was not licensed to practice medicine in New York, were providing medical treatment by unlicensed individuals and training unlicensed individuals to practice medicine. The society claimed this endangered public health and constituted a public nuisance.
Procedural History
The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action. Special Term granted the motion, holding that the society lacked standing and that primary jurisdiction belonged to the State Department of Education. The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal and granted the society leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals.
Issue(s)
Whether a society of physicians has standing to sue for an injunction to prevent a university and its employee from allegedly engaging in the unauthorized practice of medicine, given the comprehensive regulatory scheme in place under New York’s Education Law.
Holding
No, because the New York State Education Law provides a comprehensive scheme for licensing and regulating the practice of medicine, and the society has not demonstrated any special damages distinct from those suffered by the general public.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower courts’ decisions, emphasizing that Article 131 of the Education Law provides a comprehensive framework for licensing and regulating medical practice in New York. This framework includes provisions for prosecuting those who unlawfully practice medicine, with the Attorney General and the State Education Department primarily responsible for enforcement. The court noted that while the Attorney General has the power to sue for an injunction, the statute does not explicitly authorize suits by private professional associations.
The court distinguished the case from instances where bar associations are statutorily authorized to bring injunction suits, highlighting the absence of similar authorization for medical societies. The court also rejected the society’s argument that its “quasi-public status” conferred standing, citing Matter of Salter v. New York State Psychological Assn., 14 N.Y.2d 100 (N.Y. 1964), which held that a medical society cannot identify itself with the State for such purposes.
The court further noted that the society, as an association, had not sustained any special damages distinct from those suffered by the general public. The court stated, “It should be remarked, too, that whatever may be the interests of its members this plaintiff association as such has not sustained any special damage.”
The Court acknowledged the State Education Department’s uncertainty regarding whether “psycho-therapy” constitutes the practice of medicine under Education Law § 6501. However, the court clarified that this uncertainty did not grant the society the right to bring an injunction suit it would not otherwise possess. The court suggested the society should first exhaust its remedies by demanding that the Attorney General commence criminal or civil action.