Legal Opinion
Ritholz v. Johnson
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided December 9, 1943PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRosenbeRRY, C. J.
In the view that we take of.this matter, it is, not necessary to state in detail all of the facts set out in the plaintiffs’ complaint. It appears from the complaint that the plaintiffs are copartners residing in Chicago and are engaged in Wisconsin in the retail sale of eyeglasses on prescription in various cities. Details of the plan upon which they conduct their business are to be found in Ritholz v. Ammon (1942), 240 Wis. 578, 4 N. W. (2d) 173. The defendants are the persons who compose the Wisconsin Board of Examiners in Optometry and the sheriff, Stanley C. Olson, in his official…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. Carolene Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- United States v. Carolene Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Carmichael v. Southern Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Borden's Farm Products Co. v. BaldwinSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Chastleton Corp. v. SinclairSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Humiston v. MeyersWashington Supreme Court · 1963
- State Ex Rel. Thomson v. GiesselWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
- Associated Hospital Service, Inc. v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
- Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. La FolletteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
- Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District v. Committee on Water PollutionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1951
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.