Long v. Metzger, S. B. M. E., Etc.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Schaffer,
Plaintiffs, appellants, who set forth that they are doctors of chiropractic, are here seeking to relitigate controversies already determined by this court and by the Superior Court against them. The prayers of their bill are (1) that the Medical Practice Act of June 3, 1911, P. L. 639, its supplements and amendments, be declared to be in derogation of their constitutional rights and void as against the practitioners of chiropractic ; (2) that a decree be entered declaring that the act as amended does not purport to, and does not in fact, regulate the practice of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Martin v. BaldySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Commonwealth v. SeibertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Commonwealth v. ByrdSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Commonwealth v. JobeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Commonwealth v. MartindellSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. Bravo Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- Naffah v. City Deposit BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Jones v. CostlowSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
- People v. FowlerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
- Palmer v. O'HaraSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.