Legal Opinion

Shapley v. Frohmiller

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided January 25, 1946No. 4871PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STANFORD, Chief Justice.

The petitioners constitute the state board of beauty culturist examiners. The respondents are the duly elected, qualified, and acting state auditor and state treasurer. The board was created by Chapter 52, Session Laws 1935, now incorporated as Article 3, Chapter 67, A.C.A. 1939, being Sections 67-301 to 67-329, inclusive, as amended by Chapter 75, Session Laws 1941. The act creating the board relates to the practice of beauty culture, provides for the examination of applicants, licensing, and establishes fees therefor. It is contemplated by the legislature that the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Rowland v. McBrideArizona Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Hudson v. BrooksArizona Supreme Court · 1945
  3. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Arizona Corp. Commission v. Catalina Foothills EstatesArizona Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Arizona Podiatry Ass'n v. Director of InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1966
  3. Arizona Podiatry Ass'n v. Director of InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1966
  4. United States v. William BrownCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973
  5. United States v. William BrownCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973

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

Powered by the Exa API