This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

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?

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.