Legal Opinion
Bayne v. Florida State Board of Dispensing Opticians
Supreme Court of Florida
Decided July 17, 1968No. 36980PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THORNAL, Justice.
By petition for certiorari, we have for review a decision of a district court of appeal which allegedly conflicts with a prior decision of this Court on the same point of law. Fla.Const. Art. V, § 4(2), F.S.A.; Florida State Board of Dispensing Opticians v. Bayne, 204 So.2d 34 (2d Dist.Ct.App.Fla.1967).
We must decide whether the petitioners have standing to maintain a declaratory judgment proceeding.
For 36 years Maurice Hoffman has been a practicing optometrist and for 30 years John O. Bayne has been an optician. They entered into an agreement with Burdine’s. They agreed that…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- May v. HolleySupreme Court of Florida · 1952
- Stadnik v. Shell's City, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1962
- Florida State Board of Dispensing Opticians v. BayneDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1967
3Cited by5 opinions
- Jezek v. VordemaierDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1969
- Endress v. FLA. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONSDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1993
- D & W Oil Company, Inc. v. O'MALLEYDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1974
- Charleston Television, Inc. v. South Carolina Budget & Control BoardCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1988
- Charleston Television, Inc. v. South Carolina Budget & Control BoardCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1988