Treister, M.D. v. American Academy Of Orthopaedic Surgeons

78 Ill. App. 3d 746 (1979)

Facts

P applied for membership in D. P was interviewed by Dr. Louis Kolb, who informed him that there was adverse information in P's file and this information would result in the rejection of his application. D regulations forbade an examination of the file. P tried damage control, but D rejected his application. P claims that D's procedures in rejecting his application violate the Academy's bylaws. P filed a three-count complaint against D for the denial of P's application for membership. D filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action because the decision of a private, professional association rejecting an application for membership is not subject to judicial review. The trial court granted D's motion in part. P then filed a motion for compelled discovery and D opposed it in that it should be limited to a determination of the threshold issue as to whether there exists a justiciable matter. The trial court entered an order directing D to produce P's application file. D refused to produce the application file. D filed a motion for summary judgment, a motion to vacate the discovery order of February 18, 1977, on constitutional grounds, and a petition for certification of legal issues for interlocutory appeal. The court certified two questions for appeal. Does P's complaint state a cause of action, and if so, in which counts? Is the order compelling discovery a proper order?