James O. Pollard, Etc. v. Lila Cockrell, Etc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that plaintiffs who did not show they intended to patronize a massage parlor in the future lacked standing to challenge ordinances regulating such establishments
• providing that showing that an ordinance is reasonable and limited in scope defeats a claim that the ordinance is an unreasonable search and seizure
• upholding a massage parlor administrative search provision because massage establishments have “a history of regulation” (citation omitted)
• upholding provision allowing warrantless administrative searches of massage parlors at police discretion
• upholding provision allowing warrantless administrative searches of massage parlors at police discretion
• noting similarities between the sale of liquor and the business of massage

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).