From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Donohue v. Rosenthal

Oregon Supreme Court
Jun 26, 1934
34 P.2d 316 (Or. 1934)

Opinion

Argued June 6, 1934

Affirmed June 26, 1934

Appeal from Circuit Court, Lane County, H.D. NORTON, Judge.

Eugene V. Slattery, of Eugene (Slattery Slattery, of Eugene, on the brief), for appellant.

Lawrence T. Harris, of Eugene, and Harry M. Kenin, of Portland (Harris, Smith Bryson, of Eugene, and Herzog Kenin, of Portland, on the brief), for respondents.


In Banc.


AFFIRMED.


This suit challenges the constitutionality of certain parts of chapter 166, Oregon Laws, 1933, regulating advertising by dentists. It is a companion case of Semler v. Oregon State Board of Dental Examiners. All the contentions made by appellant herein have been decided adversely to him in the Semler case.

It follows that the decree dismissing this suit is affirmed. Defendants are entitled to costs and disbursements.

ROSSMAN, J., not sitting.

CAMPBELL, J., concurs in the result.


Summaries of

Donohue v. Rosenthal

Oregon Supreme Court
Jun 26, 1934
34 P.2d 316 (Or. 1934)
Case details for

Donohue v. Rosenthal

Case Details

Full title:DONOHUE, Appellant, v. ROSENTHAL ET AL., Respondents

Court:Oregon Supreme Court

Date published: Jun 26, 1934

Citations

34 P.2d 316 (Or. 1934)
34 P.2d 316

Citing Cases

Olson v. State Conservation Comm

Since a license is not a contract between the licensee and the licensing authority, constitutional provisions…