State v. Jaastad
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtLockwood, J.
This is an appeal by the state ' from a judgment of the superior court of Pima county sustaining a demurrer to a criminal information filed against the mayor, the members of the city council, and the city manager of Tucson, charging them with a violation of chapter 12 of the Session Laws of 1933, commonly known as the “minimum wage law.”
The general question as to the constitutionality of the law has been determined by us in the case of State v. Anklam et al., ante, p. 362, 31 Pac. (2d) 888, just decided. Therein we held chapter 12, supra, to be constitutional, so far as its provision for a…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- City of Pasadena v. CharlevilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- Clayton v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 1931
- Clayton v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 1931
- City of Lexington v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1902
- Hawkins v. BareWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1908
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- City of Joplin v. Industrial Commission of MissouriSupreme Court of Missouri · 1959
- City of Glendale v. CoquatArizona Supreme Court · 1935
- Desert Waters, Inc. v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1962
- Luhrs v. City of PhoenixArizona Supreme Court · 1938
- S.H. Kress Co. v. Superior Court of Maricopa CountyArizona Supreme Court · 1947
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.