Legal Opinion
MacK v. Saars
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided February 26, 1963PublishedCited by 32 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, C. J.
The plaintiff, a licensed optometrist, has appealed from a judgment of the Superior Court which sustained an order of the state board of examiners in optometry suspending his license to practice. In chapter 380 of the General Statutes, which regulates the practice of optometry, § 20-138a provides that no person shall practice optometry unless he has a license issued by the board. Under § 20-133 (e) of that chapter, the board, after a hearing, may revoke or suspend an optometrist’s license *292for aiding or abetting the practice of optometry by an unlicensed person.
The facts found by the board can…
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Poe v. UllmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Sage-Allen Co., Inc. v. WheelerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
- McMurdo v. GetterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
- State v. LevySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
- Buxton v. UllmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1959
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Kellems v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
- Hartford Electric Light Co. v. Water Resources CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1971
- Anderson v. LudginSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1978
- State v. HeinzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- Jarvis Acres, Inc. v. Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.