Thompson v. Staats

15 Wend. 395
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedMay 15, 1836
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 15 Wend. 395 (Thompson v. Staats) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Thompson v. Staats, 15 Wend. 395 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1836).

Opinion

By the Court,

Nelson, J.

The letters patent were properly rejected as irrelevant. They only authorize the patentee and his assigns to make, construct, use. and vend his newly discovered compound of medicine; not to practise physic or surgery,” within the regulations of the statutes of this state, as found in 1 R. S. 454, <§> 16 and 19. This affords a sufficient justification for the decision, if there were no other reasons for it. When the terms of the patent are broad enough to enable the patentee to put himself upon a footing with these statutes, it will be time enough, to consider the constitutional question raised by the defendant, how far the law of congress under which the patent was granted, and the laws of this state regulating the practice of physic and surgery, come in collision. The defendant pretended to no authority to practise physic under the laws of the state,.and whether he had thus practised was a question of fact which the jury found against him,

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Dankworth v. State
136 S.W. 788 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1911)
People v. Phippin
37 N.W. 888 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1888)
Eastman v. State
10 N.E. 97 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1887)
Hockett v. State
5 N.E. 178 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1886)
State v. Dent
25 W. Va. 1 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1884)
State ex rel. Powell v. State Medical Examining Board
20 N.W. 238 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1884)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
15 Wend. 395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thompson-v-staats-nysupct-1836.