Legal Opinion
Stockton Laundry Case
United States Circuit Court
Decided February 16, 1886PublishedCited by 12 opinions
On Habeas Corpus.
1Opinion of the CourtSawyer, J.
The petitioner is in custody upon a charge of violating the provisions of an ordinance of the city of Stockton, which reads as follows:
“Section 1. Tlic establishment of public laundries and public wash-houses, where clothes and other articles are cleansed for hire, within those portions of said city, other than the portions hereinafter especially mentioned, being injurious and clangorous to public health and public safety, and prejudicial to the well-being and comfort of the community, it shall be unlawful for any person or persons to establish, maintain, carry on, or conduct, or cause to bo…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Stone v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Yates v. MilwaukeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Inre Yick WoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
3Cited by12 opinions
- Gibbs v. TallyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Yee Gee v. City & County of San FranciscoDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1916
- Nation v. ChismSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
- Whitcomb v. EmersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
- People v. WarrenNew York Supreme Court · 1894
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.