Legal Opinion
In Re Maki
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 14, 1943No. Crim. 3656PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, P. J.
The question for decision in this case is whether a city ordinance is valid which forbids the administration of a massage to a person of the opposite sex unless done under the supervision of a licensed physician.
Petitioner having been convicted by the Municipal Court of Los Angeles obtained a writ of habeas corpus upon his petition which disclosed that a former judgment of dismissal had been reversed by the appellate division of the superior court. The ordinance in question is section 27.03.1, Los Angeles Municipal Code, and is as follows:
“(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Nebbia v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Virginian Railway Co. v. System Federation No. 40Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
- West Coast Hotel Co. v. ParrishSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- South Carolina State Highway Department v. Barnwell Bros.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Dunlop v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- In Re Marriage CasesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
- Lancaster v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Kisley v. City of Falls ChurchSupreme Court of Virginia · 1972
- Smith v. KeatorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- Cheek v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.