State v. Nichols
Citations
- 28 Wash. 628
- 69 P. 372
- 1902 Wash. LEXIS 529
Syllabus
<p>SUNDAY LAWS-POLICE POWER.</p> <p>The enactment of Sunday laws, requiring the cessation of labor on the score of the physical and moral well-being of society, is an appropriate exercise of the police power of the state.</p> <p>SAME-PROHIBITION OE BUSINESS-CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-DUE PROCESS.</p> <p>Bal. Code, § 7251, which provides that it shall be unlawful for any person to open on Sunday any shop, store or building, or place of business whatever, for the purpose of trade or sale of goods, wares and merchandise, is a legitimate exercise of the police power, and does not violate the constitutional prohibition against depriving a person of his property, without due process of Taw, nor is it an invasion of his constitutional right to the enjoyment of life, liberty and property.</p> <p>SAME-DISCRIMINATION BETWEEN CLASSES OE BUSINESS.</p> <p>The proviso to Bal. Code, § 7251, excepting from the operation of the statute hotels, drug stores, livery stables and undertakers does not violate the constitutional prohibition against the passage of laws granting to one class of citizens privileges or immunities which shall not equally .belong to all citizens, since there is no restriction on any person engaging in the excepted lines of business and thus obtaining equal advantages with all others engaged therein {Tacoma v. Krech, 15 Wash. 296, overruled) .</p>
Judges: Reavis
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
16 cases in this archive cite this case.
- McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court· 1961-05-29· cited 3,439×
- State v. SharplessWashington Supreme Court· 1903-03-05· cited 31×
- City of St. Louis v. DeLassusSupreme Court of Missouri· 1907-07-01· cited 29×
- County of Spokane v. Valu-Mart, Inc.Washington Supreme Court· 1966-11-10· cited 20×
- Barker v. State Fish CommissionWashington Supreme Court· 1915-11-10· cited 20×
- Ellingsen v. Franklin CountyWashington Supreme Court· 1991-05-23· cited 19×
- In re DonnellanWashington Supreme Court· 1908-05-28· cited 18×
- Motor Car Dealers' Ass'n v. Fred S. Haines Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1924-01-25· cited 16×
- State v. Fraternal Knights & LadiesWashington Supreme Court· 1904-07-12· cited 15×
- State v. BergfeldtWashington Supreme Court· 1905-12-28· cited 14×
- Thurston County v. Tenino Stone Quarries, Inc.Washington Supreme Court· 1906-11-10· cited 12×
- State ex rel. Zenner v. GrahamWashington Supreme Court· 1904-01-11· cited 11×
- Trumbull v. Jefferson CountyWashington Supreme Court· 1905-03-23· cited 9×
- State v. McCollumWashington Supreme Court· 1943-03-16· cited 4×
- City of Springfield v. RichterIllinois Supreme Court· 1913-02-20· cited 4×
- In Re The Complex Litigation Div. Of Wa AgCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2026-03-02
Cites
15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Petit v. MinnesotaSupreme Court· 1900-04-09· cited 88×
- Lindenmuller v. PeopleNew York Supreme Court· 1861-02-04· cited 43×
- People v. BelletMichigan Supreme Court· 1894-02-20· cited 38×
- White v. HermannIllinois Supreme Court· 1869-09-15· cited 35×
- Ex Parte KoserCalifornia Supreme Court· 1882-03-10· cited 27×
- State v. PetitSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1898-12-02· cited 27×
- Liberman v. StateNebraska Supreme Court· 1889-05-16· cited 25×
- Ex parte BurkeCalifornia Supreme Court· 1881-07-15· cited 20×
- Frolickstein v. Mayor of MobileSupreme Court of Alabama· 1867-06-15· cited 19×
- Voglesong v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 1857-05-27· cited 16×
- City of Tacoma v. KrechWashington Supreme Court· 1896-09-28· cited 14×
- State v. ConsidineWashington Supreme Court· 1897-01-26· cited 14×
- Gabel v. City of HoustonTexas Supreme Court· 1867-01-15· cited 13×
- Warner v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1830-06-15· cited 8×
- In re KingU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Tennessee· 1891-08-01· cited 3×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.