Legal Opinion
State v. Boren
Washington Supreme Court
Decided June 7, 1950No. 31279PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSchwellenbach, J.
The state of Washington, and Foote and Zech, as interveners, commenced an action in the superior court for King county, alleging that defendants Boren and Shepherd had never been licensed to practice dentistry in the state of Washington, but that they had been and were then practicing dentistry in Seattle; that defendant Harlow was aiding and abetting them in the practice of dentistry at 1909 Westlake avenue, in Seattle; that defendant Stickels was aiding and abetting them in the practice of dentistry at 1410 Second avenue, Seattle. Plaintiff prayed that the defendants be enjoined from such…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Matter of Co-Operative Law Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1910
- Painless Parker v. Board of Dental Exam.California Supreme Court · 1932
- Ezell v. RitholzSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1938
- State ex rel. Smith v. Board of Dental ExaminersWashington Supreme Court · 1903
- Campbell v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1942
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Kaul v. City of ChehalisWashington Supreme Court · 1954
- State v. LeeWashington Supreme Court · 1963
- Brisendine v. State, Dept. of CommerceMontana Supreme Court · 1992
- State v. BorenWashington Supreme Court · 1953
- Brisendine v. StateMontana Supreme Court · 1991
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.