Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Opinion No. (1991)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports

Decided December 5, 1991Published

1Opinion of the Court

Dear Secretary-Treasurer, Foster

¶ 0 The Attorney General has received your letter asking for an official opinion addressing, in effect, the following question:

May a licensed optometrist lease or sublease offfice spacefrom a retail optical supplier or seller?

¶ 1 In order to answer this question, one must review both the statutes governing the practice of optometry (59 O.S. 581 (1981) et seq., as amended) and the statutes regulating the sale of optical goods (59 O.S. 941 (1981) et seq., as amended). The two most relevant statutes are 59 O.S. 596 (1981), and 59 O.S.944 (1981). 59 O.S. 596, in…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
  2. Oliver v. City of TulsaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1982
  3. Cave Springs Public School District I-30 v. BlairSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1980
  4. State v. GoforthSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1989
  5. State Ex Rel. Cartwright v. Georgia-Pacific Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1982

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API