Legal Opinion
Locke v. Shore
District Court, N.D. Florida
Decided February 4, 2010No. Case No. 4:09cv193-RH/WCSPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION ON THE MERITS
ROBERT L. HINKLE, District Judge.
Under Florida law, a person must have a license in order to “practice” nonresidential “interior design.” A person may provide residential interior design services without a license but may not advertise or hold herself out as an “interior designer.” The plaintiffs assert that “interior design,” as defined by the governing statute, includes many activities for which a state may not constitutionally require a license, and that a state may not constitutionally ban truthful commercial speech advertising a person’s lawful “interior design”…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Broadrick v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Tepeyac v. Montgomery CountyDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2011
- A Woman's Friend Pregnancy Resource Clinic v. HarrisDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2015
- Stuart v. LoomisDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2014
- Truck-Lite Co., LLC v. Grote Industries, Inc.District Court, W.D. New York · 2020