Reyburn v. Minnesota State Board of Optometry
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Matson, Justice.
Appeal is from an order denying plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial.
Plaintiffs are optometrists licensed to practice by the State of Minnesota. Upon the separate complaints of Dr. Carel C. Koch, plaintiffs were cited and required to appear before the Minnesota State Board of Optometry to show cause why their licenses should not be revoked or suspended. The complaints alleged, among other things, that plaintiffs had in the past and at the time of the complaint an arrangement or agreement with the King Optical Company, a dispensing optician, whereby said company has been engaged…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Panama Refining Co. v. RyanSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Semler v. Oregon State Board of Dental ExaminersSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Lee v. DelmontSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
- State ex rel. Powell v. State Medical Examining BoardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
- Bell v. Board of Regents of the UniversityNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- Kansas State Board of Healing Arts v. FooteSupreme Court of Kansas · 1968
- Chastek v. AndersonIllinois Supreme Court · 1981
- Anderson v. Commissioner of HighwaysSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964
- Pennsylvania State Board of Pharmacy v. CohenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
- Kee v. BaberTexas Supreme Court · 1957
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.