Case ID: or_147/html/0408-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BELT, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Argued June 6;
    affirmed June 26, 1934
    DONOHUE, Appellant, v. ROSENTHAL et al., Respondents
    
    (34 P. (2d) 316)
    
      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.
   BELT, J.

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.