Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Harris v. Kindy Optical Co.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided May 7, 1940PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was filed June 4, 1940:

Fairchild, J.

Unless the appellant offends against the law by employing licensed and registered optometrists to assist in its business of serving its customers by adjusting glasses tO' their eyes, there is no ground for the complaint against it. It admits that it does employ two^ licensed optometrists in its business. It furnishes them certain devices and machines to be used by them, and it sells lenses to persons on prescriptions written by those employees. Where glasses are found to be required, the prescription is made out and filled in the store…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Wisconsin Industrial School for Girls v. Clark CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Wisconsin Power & Light Co. v. City of BeloitWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Golding v. Schubach Optical Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Price v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1919
  5. Muldowney v. McCoy Hotel Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1936

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Kindy v. HayesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  2. MacK v. SaarsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1963
  3. State v. MaasWisconsin Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Holtan v. BjornsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
  5. (1971), Wisconsin Attorney General Reports1971

4 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