Legal Opinion

Whitten v. California State Board of Optometry

California Supreme Court

Decided March 16, 1937No. L. A. 16082PublishedCited by 50 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.

This case was transferred to this court after decision by the District Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Two, in order that we might give further consideration to the propriety of the issuance of the writ of prohibition to restrain the respondent board from taking further action in proceedings to revoke the license of Ward M. Whitten for the making of untrue statements in his advertising in violation of the Optometry Law. (Stats. 1913, p. 1097.) The action was commenced in the superior court and the peremptory writ of prohibition was ordered to issue. The board prosecutes…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Standard Oil Co. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Reclamation District No. 1500 v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Suckow v. AldersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Camron v. KenfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
  5. Dominguez Land Corp. v. DaughertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by50 opinions

  1. Bixby v. PiernoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Bodinson Manufacturing Co. v. California Employment CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Drummey v. State Board of Funeral Directors & EmbalmersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Fukuda v. City of AngelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Laisne v. California State Board of OptometryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942

45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API