State v. Sharpless
Citations
- 31 Wash. 191
- 71 P. 737
- 1903 Wash. LEXIS 604
Syllabus
<p>BARBERS-REGULATION AND LICENSING OF OCCUPATION-STATUTES —1 TITLE OF ACT.</p> <p>The title of an act reciting that it is “an act to regulate the practice of barbering and licensing of persons to carry on such practice, and providing punishment for its violation,” is broad enough to embrace provisions in the act for the appointment of a board of examiners, and their duties and compensation, for the regulation of apprentices, and for the payment of license fees.</p> <p>SAME-CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-LOCAL AND CLASS LEGISLATION.</p> <p>The act to regulate barbering (Laws 1901, p. 349) is not void on the ground of being local, class, and special legislation because of the fact that it divides the communities of the state into classes, for which different regulations are provided, when the law is made to operate equally upon all barbers within the respective classifications.</p> <p>SAME.</p> <p>The fact that a law proivdes for the issuance of a certificate without examination, upon the payment of one dollar, to all barbers carrying on their occupation in cities of the first, second and third classes at the time the act took effect, while barbers subsequently coming into those cities would be required to stand examination and pay five dollars for a certificate, would not render the act void as discriminating against one class of citizens in favor of others, since the law operates equally upon all who fall unuer its operation.</p> <p>SAME-APPLICATION OF ACT.</p> <p>An act making it “unlawful for any person to follow the occupation of barber in any incorporated city or town in this state,” under certain conditions, is not restricted in its application' to such municipalities only as were incorporated at the time of its passage.</p> <p>STATUTES-REASON FOE ENACTMENT-PROVINCE OF LEGISLATURE.</p> <p>Courts will not pass upon the sufficiency of the reason for the enactment of a law, which is not in conflict with some constitut’onal provi-ion.</p>
Judges: Mount
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
22 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Cooper v. RollinsSupreme Court of Georgia· 1922-02-14· cited 71×
- Madison v. StateWashington Supreme Court· 2007-07-26· cited 67×
- City of Seattle v. BittnerWashington Supreme Court· 1973-01-11· cited 64×
- Allen v. City of BellinghamWashington Supreme Court· 1917-02-17· cited 49×
- State ex rel. Richey v. SmithWashington Supreme Court· 1906-03-09· cited 35×
- Beaty v. Humphrey, State AuditorSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1938-04-11· cited 32×
- Grant County Fire Protection District No. 5 v. City of Moses LakeWashington Supreme Court· 2002-03-14· cited 28×
- Hoff v. StateSuperior Court of Delaware· 1938-01-31· cited 27×
- State ex rel. Nettleton v. CaseWashington Supreme Court· 1905-07-14· cited 26×
- State v. WalkerWashington Supreme Court· 1907-12-07· cited 17×
- State v. Asotin CountyWashington Supreme Court· 1914-05-18· cited 17×
- State v. OakleyWashington Supreme Court· 1924-05-07· cited 13×
- State ex rel. Zenner v. GrahamWashington Supreme Court· 1904-01-11· cited 11×
- Timmons v. MorrisW.D. Washington· 1921-02-14· cited 11×
- Lewer v. CorneliusWashington Supreme Court· 1913-02-13· cited 10×
- City Sanitary Service, Inc. v. Washington Utilities & Transportation CommissionWashington Supreme Court· 1964-07-09· cited 8×
- McKnight v. McDonaldWashington Supreme Court· 1904-01-11· cited 7×
- State ex rel. McFadden v. ShorrockWashington Supreme Court· 1909-10-06· cited 6×
- Aylmore v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court· 1907-12-10· cited 5×
- In re ChristensenWashington Supreme Court· 1910-07-11· cited 5×
Cites
15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Missouri v. LewisSupreme Court· 1880-04-12· cited 375×
- Lancey v. King CountyWashington Supreme Court· 1896-06-18· cited 53×
- McDaniels v. J. J. Connelly Shoe Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1902-12-30· cited 50×
- State v. DentWest Virginia Supreme Court· 1884-11-01· cited 40×
- State v. ZenoSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1900-02-05· cited 33×
- State v. NicholsWashington Supreme Court· 1902-06-16· cited 30×
- State ex rel. Walker v. GreenIndiana Supreme Court· 1887-12-02· cited 26×
- Redford v. Spokane Street Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1896-10-27· cited 24×
- Fitch v. ApplegateWashington Supreme Court· 1901-02-09· cited 24×
- City of Seattle v. BartoWashington Supreme Court· 1903-02-25· cited 24×
- State v. PennoyerSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 1889-06-05· cited 18×
- State v. BairSupreme Court of Iowa· 1900-12-20· cited 17×
- State v. ConsidineWashington Supreme Court· 1897-01-26· cited 14×
- Hathaway v. McDonaldWashington Supreme Court· 1902-03-15· cited 14×
- State v. WilcoxSupreme Court of Kansas· 1902-04-05· cited 14×
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.