Legal Opinion

Hide-A-Way Massage Parlor, Inc. v. Board of County Commissioners

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided July 9, 1979No. 28463PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Carrigan

The Board of County Commissioners of Adams County (the Board) appeals the Adams County District Court’s determination that the Colorado Massage Parlor Code, 1 was applied by the Board in a manner which deprived Hide-A-Way Massage Parlor, Inc. of due process of law. We affirm.

The Colorado Massage Parlor Code (the Code), effective July 1, 1977, requires the operator of a massage parlor to obtain a license from the licensing authority in the municipality or county in which the establishment is located. The Code establishes two considerations, among others, to be considered by the local licensing…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Elizondo v. STATE, DEPT. OF REVENUE, ETC.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1977
  2. Meier v. SchooleySupreme Court of Colorado · 1961
  3. Wadlow v. HartmanSupreme Court of Colorado · 1976

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Cottrell v. City & County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1981
  2. City and County of Denver v. EggertSupreme Court of Colorado · 1982
  3. Soon Yee Scott v. City of EnglewoodColorado Court of Appeals · 1983
  4. Sears, Roebuck and Co. v. BacaSupreme Court of Colorado · 1984
  5. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. City of LakewoodSupreme Court of Colorado · 1990

4 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