Legal Opinion
Fields v. District of Columbia
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided July 25, 1967No. 4066PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HOOD, Chief Judge.
Appellant was convicted of practicing optometry without a license in violation of D.C.Code 1961, § 2-502 (Supp. V, 1966), which makes it unlawful to engage in the practice of optometry without a license. 1 The practice of optometry is defined by Section 2-501 of our Code as
the application of optical principles through technical methods and devices in the examination of the human eye for the purpose of determining visual defects, and the adaptation of lenses for the aid and relief thereof.
The major question presented by this appeal is whether the adaptation and fitting of…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Delaware Optometric Corporation v. SherwoodSupreme Court of Delaware · 1957
- United States v. Capital Traction Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1910
- Stacy Evers v. Herbert A. Buxbaum, T/a Rubin Optical Company, and Dr. Joseph FriedmanCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1958
- STATE Ex Rel REED v. KUZIRIANOregon Supreme Court · 1961
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Watson v. House of VisionIllinois Supreme Court · 1974
- State Ex Rel. Londerholm v. DoolinSupreme Court of Kansas · 1972
- State Ex Inf. Danforth v. Dale Curteman, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1972
- State Ex Rel. Clifton v. ReeserSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1975
- State ex rel. State Board of Examiners in Optometry v. KuhwaldCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1977
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.