Legal Opinion

State v. B Bar Enterprises, Inc.

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided July 28, 1982No. 15847PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GORDON, Vice Chief Justice:

This case arose under A.R.S. §§ 12-801 et seq., the Bawdy House Abatement Act. Appellants challenge the constitutionality of that act. Taking jurisdiction under Ariz. Const.Art. 6, § 5(3) and Ariz.R.Civ.App.P. 19(e), we affirm the trial court’s denial of appellants’ motion to dismiss.

Appellants operated “massage parlors” in Maricopa County. Customers would pay a woman working at the parlor for a massage. The woman would tell the customer that most of the fee would go to the parlor operator and that she worked primarily for “tips.” After a brief massage, the woman…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Dombrowski v. PfisterSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  3. Stanley v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  4. Paris Adult Theatre I v. SlatonSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. Mitchell v. W. T. Grant Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974

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

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Martin v. ReinsteinCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1999
  2. Sears v. HullArizona Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Armory Park Neighborhood Ass'n v. Episcopal Community ServicesArizona Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Big D Construction Corp. v. Court of AppealsArizona Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Father in Pima County Juvenile Action No. S-114487 v. AdamArizona Supreme Court · 1994

36 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