Legal Opinion
Johnson v. Ervin
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided April 6, 1939No. 32,059PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Holt, Justice.
Plaintiff, a licensed beauty culturist, for herself and others similarly situated, seeks a declaratory judgment decreeing two sections of the act regulating and licensing barbers unconstitutional and enjoining the enforcement thereof by defendants, the attorney general, the county attorney, and the state board of barber examiners. Defendants’ demurrer to the complaint was sustained, and plaintiff appeals.
The complaint is lengthy and need not be set out in extenso. The two sections challenged as unconstitutional are 3 Mason Minn. St. 1938 Supp. §§ 5846-2 and 5846-4 (L. 1927, c.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Allgeyer v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- State v. ZenoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- Banghart v. WalshIllinois Supreme Court · 1930
- Lane v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1930
- State v. De GuileSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- United Interchange, Inc. v. SpellacySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1957
- Minnesota Board of Barber Examiners v. LauranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
- State v. SullivanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
- Jeffs v. Board of Examiners of BarbersMichigan Supreme Court · 1948
- Grassman v. Minnesota Board of Barber ExaminersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.