Legal Opinion
Rosenblatt v. California State Board of Pharmacy
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 1, 1945No. Civ. 7148PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPeek, J.
Petitioner herein seeks to compel the respondent State Board of Pharmacy to issue to him a renewal of his license as an assistant pharmacist.
By his petition it is alleged he was a duly licensed assistant pharmacist under the laws of this state and in accordance with the provisions of an act entitled “An Act to Regulate the Practice of Pharmacy.” (Stats. 1905, chap, cdvi, p. 535.) This act was amended from time to time, and in 1937 sections 4160 to 4162 were added to the Business and Professions Code as a part of the codification thereof, and which read:
“4160. Registered assistant pharmacists…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Hurtado v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Dent v. West VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Hawker v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Reetz v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Stohr v. San Francisco Musical Fund SocietyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- San Gabriel Tribune v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
- Conderback, Inc. v. Standard Oil Co.California Court of Appeal · 1966
- City and County of Denver v. EggertSupreme Court of Colorado · 1982
- Perry v. Medical Practice BoardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1999
- Brawley v. Crosby Research Foundation, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1946
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.