Legal Opinion

Cornwell v. Hamilton

District Court, S.D. California

Decided August 18, 1999No. 97 CV 138-B (POR)PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF CORNWELL’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFF AHNHA’S MOTION AND DEFENDANTS’ CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; ORDER SETTING STATUS CONFERENCE

BREWSTER, Senior District Judge.

I. Introduction

This case involves the question of whether, as applied, the State of California’s Barbering and Cosmetology Act and implementing regulations violate Plaintiffs’ Due Process and Equal Protection rights.

II. Background

A. Plaintiffs’ Claims

The causes of action legally relevant to these motions are Plaintiffs’ claim that the cosmetology regulations as applied violate…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
  5. Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Powers v. HarrisCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
  2. Merrifield v. LockyerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  3. Clayton v. SteinagelDistrict Court, D. Utah · 2012
  4. Brantley v. KuntzDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · 2015
  5. Natu Bah v. Attorney General of the State of Tenn.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2015

18 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