Legal Opinion

Saunders v. Swann

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided April 9, 1927PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Chambliss

This bill was brought under the Declaratory Judgment Act to test the constitutionality of chapter 99', Acts of 1925, regulating the practice of Optometry. The Chancellor sustained the act.

While several of its provisions are attacked as in violation of section 8 of articles XI and I, the provision most specifically complained of appears to be that limiting the practice of any one “Itinerant Optometrist,” as defined in the act, to not more than any .three such counties in the State as he may select. We are not of opinion that this limitation is so unreasonable and arbitrary as to violate the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. McNaughton v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
  2. Kirk v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1911

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Loser v. National Optical Stores Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Georgia State Board of Examiners in Optometry v. Friedmans' Jewelers Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1936
  3. State Ex Rel. Attorney General v. Gus Blass Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1937
  4. New Jersey State Board of Optometrists v. S. S. Kresge Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1934
  5. State v. SowderCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1991

6 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