williamson
lee
optical
argued
march
decided
march
provisions
oklahoma
statute
making
unlawful
person
licensed
optometrist
ophthalmologist
fit
lenses
face
duplicate
replace
frames
lenses
optical
appliances
except
upon
written
prescriptive
authority
oklahoma
licensed
ophthalmologist
optometrist
invalid
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
roschen
ward
pp
subject
opticians
regulatory
system
exempting
sellers
glasses
violate
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
pp
provision
making
unlawful
solicit
sale
frames
mountings
optical
appliances
violate
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
pp
provision
forbidding
retail
merchandiser
rent
space
sublease
departments
otherwise
permit
person
purporting
eye
examination
visual
care
occupy
space
retail
store
violate
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
pp
provision
making
unlawful
solicit
sale
spectacles
eyeglasses
lenses
prisms
use
advertising
media
constitutional
supp
affirmed
part
reversed
part
together
lee
optical
oklahoma
et
al
williamson
attorney
general
oklahoma
et
also
appeal
james
harkin
assistant
attorney
general
oklahoma
argued
cause
appellants
appellees
brief
mac
williamson
attorney
general
fred
hansen
first
assistant
attorney
general
leroy
powers
edmund
brown
attorney
general
california
eimo
funke
assistant
attorney
general
counsel
brief
dick
woods
argued
cause
appellees
appellants
brief
duke
duvall
john
phillips
philip
perlman
argued
cause
american
optometric
association
amicus
curiae
urging
reversal
affirmance
brief
ellis
lyons
william
maccracken
special
leave
herbert
bergson
argued
cause
filed
brief
guild
prescription
opticians
america
et
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
affirmance
filed
arkansas
tom
gentry
attorney
general
james
sloan
assistant
attorney
general
carl
langston
california
edmund
brown
attorney
general
funke
assistant
attorney
general
dan
kaufmann
deputy
attorney
general
kansas
harold
fatzer
attorney
general
paul
wilson
first
assistant
attorney
general
mississippi
coleman
attorney
general
richard
billups
special
assistant
attorney
general
justice
douglas
delivered
opinion
suit
instituted
district
oklahoma
law
stat
ann
laws
declared
unconstitutional
enjoin
state
officials
enforcing
reason
allegedly
violated
various
provisions
federal
constitution
matter
heard
district
three
judges
required
held
certain
provisions
law
unconstitutional
supp
case
appeal
district
held
unconstitutional
portions
three
sections
act
first
held
invalid
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
portions
make
unlawful
person
licensed
optometrist
ophthalmologist
fit
lenses
face
duplicate
replace
frames
lenses
optical
appliances
except
upon
written
prescriptive
authority
oklahoma
licensed
ophthalmologist
optometrist
ophthalmologist
duly
licensed
physician
specializes
care
eyes
optometrist
examines
eyes
refractive
error
recognizes
treat
diseases
eye
fills
prescriptions
eyeglasses
optician
artisan
qualified
grind
lenses
fill
prescriptions
fit
frames
effect
forbid
optician
fitting
duplicating
lenses
without
prescription
ophthalmologist
optometrist
practical
effect
means
optician
fit
old
glasses
new
frames
supply
lens
whether
new
lens
one
duplicate
lost
broken
lens
without
prescription
district
conceded
competence
police
power
state
regulate
examination
eyes
rebelled
notion
state
require
prescription
optometrist
ophthalmologist
take
old
lenses
place
new
frames
fit
completed
spectacles
face
eyeglass
wearer
held
requirement
reasonably
rationally
related
health
welfare
people
found
mechanical
devices
ordinary
skills
optician
take
broken
lens
fragment
thereof
measure
power
reduce
prescriptive
terms
held
although
precise
issue
duplication
legislature
instant
regulation
dealing
matter
public
interest
particular
means
chosen
neither
reasonably
necessary
reasonably
related
end
sought
achieved
accordingly
opinion
provision
law
violated
due
process
clause
arbitrarily
interfering
optician
right
business
think
due
process
question
answered
principle
roschen
ward
upheld
new
york
statute
making
unlawful
sell
eyeglasses
retail
store
unless
duly
licensed
physician
optometrist
charge
personal
attendance
said
wherever
requirements
act
stop
doubt
presence
superintendence
specialist
tend
diminish
evil
oklahoma
law
may
exact
needless
wasteful
requirement
many
cases
legislature
courts
balance
advantages
disadvantages
new
requirement
appears
many
cases
optician
easily
supply
new
frames
new
lenses
without
reference
old
written
prescription
also
appears
many
written
prescriptions
contain
directive
data
regard
fitting
spectacles
face
cases
directions
contained
prescription
essential
glasses
fitted
correct
particular
defects
vision
alleviate
eye
condition
legislature
might
concluded
frequency
occasions
prescription
necessary
sufficient
justify
regulation
fitting
eyeglasses
likewise
necessary
duplicate
lens
written
prescription
may
may
necessary
legislature
might
concluded
one
needed
often
enough
require
one
every
case
legislature
may
concluded
eye
examinations
critical
correction
vision
also
detection
latent
ailments
diseases
every
change
frames
every
duplication
lens
accompanied
prescription
medical
expert
sure
present
law
require
new
examination
eyes
every
time
frames
changed
lenses
duplicated
old
prescription
file
optician
go
ahead
make
new
fitting
duplicate
lenses
law
need
every
respect
logically
consistent
aims
constitutional
enough
evil
hand
correction
might
thought
particular
legislative
measure
rational
way
correct
day
gone
uses
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
strike
state
laws
regulatory
business
industrial
conditions
may
unwise
improvident
harmony
particular
school
thought
see
nebbia
new
york
west
coast
hotel
parrish
olsen
nebraska
lincoln
union
northwestern
daniel
family
ins
lighting
missouri
emphasize
chief
justice
waite
said
munn
illinois
protection
abuses
legislatures
people
must
resort
polls
courts
secondly
district
held
violated
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
subject
opticians
regulatory
system
exempt
act
sellers
glasses
problem
legislative
classification
perennial
one
admitting
doctrinaire
definition
evils
field
may
different
dimensions
proportions
requiring
different
remedies
legislature
may
think
tigner
texas
reform
may
take
one
step
time
addressing
phase
problem
seems
acute
legislative
mind
semler
dental
examiners
legislature
may
select
one
phase
one
field
apply
remedy
neglecting
others
american
sash
prohibition
equal
protection
clause
goes
invidious
discrimination
say
point
reached
record
shows
branch
business
may
loom
large
oklahoma
may
present
problems
regulation
distinct
branch
third
district
held
unconstitutional
violative
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
portion
makes
unlawful
solicit
sale
frames
mountings
optical
appliances
conceded
state
regulation
advertising
relating
eye
examinations
matter
rationally
related
public
health
welfare
therefore
subject
regulation
within
principles
semler
dental
examiners
supra
regulation
advertising
eyeglass
frames
said
intrude
mercantile
field
casually
related
visual
care
public
restrict
activity
way
detrimentally
affect
people
eyeglass
frame
considered
isolation
piece
merchandise
eyeglass
frame
used
isolation
judge
murrah
said
dissent
used
lenses
lenses
pertaining
human
eye
enter
field
health
therefore
legislature
might
conclude
regulate
one
effectively
regulate
might
conclude
sellers
frames
sellers
lenses
business
advertising
limited
even
abolished
public
interest
semler
dental
examiners
supra
advertiser
frames
may
using
ads
bring
customers
buy
lenses
advertisement
lenses
abolished
controlled
advertising
frames
must
come
restraints
legislature
might
think
see
constitutional
reason
state
may
treat
deal
human
eye
members
profession
use
merchandising
methods
obtaining
customers
fourth
district
held
unconstitutional
violative
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
provision
oklahoma
act
reads
follows
person
firm
corporation
engaged
business
retailing
merchandise
general
public
shall
rent
space
sublease
departments
otherwise
permit
person
purporting
eye
examination
visual
care
occupy
space
retail
store
said
sufficient
dispose
appeal
conclusion
district
portion
makes
unlawful
solicit
sale
spectacles
eyeglasses
lenses
prisms
use
advertising
media
constitutional
contentions
urged
appellants
without
merit
affirmed
part
reversed
part
footnotes
shall
unlawful
person
firm
corporation
company
partnership
licensed
provisions
chapter
chapter
title
oklahoma
statutes
fit
adjust
adapt
manner
apply
lenses
frames
prisms
optical
appliances
face
person
duplicate
attempt
duplicate
place
replace
frames
lenses
optical
appliances
prescribed
fitted
adjusted
visual
correction
intended
aid
human
vision
give
treatment
training
designed
aid
human
vision
represent
hold
public
qualified
acts
listed
section
except
persons
licensed
provisions
chapters
title
oklahoma
statutes
may
written
prescription
duplicate
authorize
optical
supplier
interpret
prescription
accordance
therewith
may
measure
adapt
fit
prepare
dispense
adjust
lenses
spectacles
eye
glasses
prisms
tinted
lenses
frames
appurtenances
thereto
human
face
aid
correction
visual
ocular
anomalies
human
eye
may
continue
said
acts
aforesaid
written
prescription
duplicate
provided
however
physician
optometrist
writing
prescription
shall
remain
responsible
full
effect
appliances
furnished
person
provided
section
shall
prevent
qualified
person
making
repairs
eye
glasses
section
reads
follows
shall
unlawful
person
firm
company
corporation
partnership
solicit
sale
spectacles
eye
glasses
lenses
frames
mountings
prisms
optical
appliances
devices
eye
examinations
visual
services
radio
window
display
television
telephone
directory
display
advertisement
means
advertisement
use
method
means
baiting
persuading
enticing
public
buying
spectacles
eye
glasses
lenses
frames
mounting
prisms
optical
appliances
visual
correction
provided
however
provisions
act
shall
render
newspaper
advertising
media
liable
publishing
advertising
furnished
vendor
said
commodity
material
shall
anything
act
prevent
ethical
education
publicity
advertising
legally
qualified
health
groups
violate
presently
existing
laws
oklahoma
prevent
proper
use
ethical
professional
notices
nothing
act
shall
prohibit
sale
glasses
equipped
lenses
sunglasses
equipped
plano
lenses
industrial
glasses
goggles
plano
lenses
used
industrial
eye
protection
sold
merchandise
established
places
business
selection
glasses
discretion
purchaser
see
note
supra
also
said
advertising
directed
exclusively
feature
eye
wear
deleterious
effect
public
inasmuch
influence
prospective
wearer
eyeglasses
present
wearer
person
already
examined
licensed
professional
mere
piece
merchandise
dispensing
optician
merchant
particular
arbitrarily
divested
substantial
portion
business
upon
pretext
deprivation
rationally
related
public
health