Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Rones, 67 So. 2d 99.

36 citing documents.

State Of Louisiana v. Tazin Ardell Hill (Parish of Lafayette) The district court's declaration that the statutes are … La. 2020
State v. Brenner , So.2d 99 (1953).” State v. Griffin, 495 So.
State of Louisiana v. Anthony Strong La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
1986); So.2d 99, 105 (1953)).
State of Louisiana v. Valentino Roman Hodge La. 2019
1986); So.2d 99, 105 (1953)).
State v. Bazile 144 So. 3d 719 La. 2013
Louisiana High School Athletics Ass'n v. State 107 So. 3d 583 La. 2013
State of Louisiana v. Hatton, 07-2377 (La.7/1/08), (citing State v. Fleury, 01-0871, p. 5 (La.10/16/01), ; , (1953)).
Douglas v. Children's Hospital 69 So. 3d 434 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Fleury, 01-0871 (La.10/16/01), ; , (1953).
State ex rel. A.J. 27 So. 3d 247 La. 2009
In Re State Ex Rel. AJ 27 So. 3d 247 La. 2009
State v. Hatton 985 So. 2d 709 La. 2008
State v. Fleury, 01-0871, p. 5 (La.10/16/01), ; , (1953).
State v. Brown 648 So. 2d 872 La. 1995
State v. Francis 546 So. 2d 1357 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
(1953) to support her position that experts may testify “as to the meaning of technical words or terms which pertain to their trade, profession or occupation,” but not the interpretation of a statute which is “a judicial question.” However, in Rones optometrists testified as to what constituted the
State v. Coleman 528 So. 2d 192 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
State v. Griffin 495 So. 2d 1306 La. 1986
Regira v. Falsetta 405 So. 2d 850 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Nomey v. State 315 So. 2d 709 La. 1975
Bradley v. Jones 297 So. 2d 198 La. 1974
372 , (1971); , (1953); Union Sulphur Co. v. Parish of Calcasieu, 153 La.
Mid-Louisiana Gas Company v. Sanchez 280 So. 2d 406 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1973
But its unconstitutionality would have been cured by its inclusion in the Revised Statutes, , (1953).
Ancor v. Belden Concrete Products, Inc. 256 So. 2d 122 La. 1971
764 , (1962); , (1953); Union Sulphur Co. v. Parish of Calcasieu, 153 La.
Victory Electric Works, Inc. v. Maryland Cas. Co. 230 So. 2d 287 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1970
On the effect of incorporation into the Revised Statutes of 1950 if the source law were defectively enacted, , -104 (1953).
Meyers v. City of Baton Rouge 185 So. 2d 278 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
Reynolds v. Louisiana Board of Alcoholic Beverage Control 185 So. 2d 794 La. 1966
Louisiana State Board of Optometry Examiners v. Pearle Optical of Alexandria, Inc. 184 So. 2d 10 La. 1966
We had occasion to consider the provisions of LRS 37:1065 , .
Louisiana State Board of Optometry Examiners v. Pearle Optical of Alexandria, Inc. 177 So. 2d 164 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
No retail dealer shall directly or indirectly, advertise through any medium the sale of glasses, or peddle, solicit, sell, or offer for sale glasses from door to door, or house to house, or away from his permanent established place of business.” , , our Supreme Court stated that LSA-R.S.
State v. Guidry 173 So. 2d 192 La. 1965
Olivedell Planting Co., Inc. v. Town of Lake Providence, 217 La.
State v. Guidry 173 So. 2d 192 La. 1965
[2] , ; Olivedell Planting Co., Inc. v. Town of Lake Providence, 217 La.
Michell v. Louisiana State Board of Optometry Examiners 156 So. 2d 457 La. 1963
Akin v. Louisiana State Board of Optometry Examiners 150 So. 2d 807 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1963
Police Jury v. St. Charles Parish Waterworks District No. 2 146 So. 2d 800 La. 1962
Interstate Oil Pipe Line Co. v. Guilbeau, 217 La.
Michell v. Louisiana State Board of Optometry Exam. 146 So. 2d 863 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1962
Michon v. Louisiana State Board of Optometry Examiners, La.App., .
State v. Goldfinch 132 So. 2d 860 La. 1961
630 , ; , ; State v. McCrory, 237 La.
Michon v. LOUISIANA STATE BOARD OF OPTOMETRY EXAM. 121 So. 2d 565 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1960
In this connection the case of State v. Rones, 1953, , , is of some interest, but inapposite to the point under discussion.
Louisiana Motor Vehicle Com'n v. WHEELING FRENCH. 103 So. 2d 464 La. 1958
See State v. Rogers, supra, , .
Kihneman v. Louisiana State Board of Optometry Examiners 96 So. 2d 402 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
1324 ], In truth, the argument now made on this score is not in *407 reality grounded on the due process clause but is a rehash of the same contention made under the asserted denial of equal protection of the laws.” , , it was held that the practice of optometry, which, by its very nature, is closely related to the public health and welfare, is subject to governmental regulation by the Legislature under its police power.
Archer v. City of Shreveport 85 So. 2d 337 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1956
Olan Mills, Inc. of Tennessee v. City of Bogalusa 73 So. 2d 791 La. 1954
Chapman v. City of Shreveport 74 So. 2d 142 La. 1954