Case Name: DONOHUE, Appellant, v. ROSENTHAL et al., Respondents
Court: Oregon Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1934-06-26
Citations: 147 Or. 408
Docket Number: 
Parties: DONOHUE, Appellant, v. ROSENTHAL et al., Respondents
Judges: Rossman, J., not sitting.
Reporter: Oregon Reports
Volume: 147
Pages: 408–408

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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.