Legal Opinion

Maryland State Board of Barber Examiners v. Kuhn

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided December 5, 1973No. [No. 90, September Term, 1973.]PublishedCited by 59 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLevine, J.

We are concerned here with the constitutionality of a statutory scheme which permits barbers to cut the hair of both men and women, but restricts cosmetologists, 1 such as appellees, to cutting the hair of women. We thus focus on two statutory provisions. Maryland Code (1957, 1973 Supp.) Art. 43, § 529 (a), under the subtitle, Cosmetologists, currently provides:

“(a) The term ‘beauty culture’ includes any and all work done for compensation by any person which work is generally and usually performed by so-called hairdressers, cosmetologists, cosmetologists aides, cosmeticians, beauticians or…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  2. Reed v. ReedSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
  4. Mugler v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  5. Frontiero v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1973

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

3Cited by59 opinions

  1. Ashish Patel, Anverali Satani, Nazira Momin, Minaz Chamadia, and Vijay Lakshmi Yogi v. Texas Department of Licensing and RegulationTexas Supreme Court · 2015
  2. Attorney General of Maryland v. WaldronCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1981
  3. Attorney General v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
  4. Hornbeck v. Somerset County Board of EducationCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1983
  5. Governor of the State v. Exxon Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1978

54 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