California Ass'n of Dispensing Opticians v. Pearle Vision Center, Inc.

Caution
143 Cal. App. 3d 419·191 Cal. Rptr. 762·1983 Cal. App. LEXIS 1773
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 27, 1983Civ. 28420California5,125 words

Opinion

Opinion

Staniforth, J.

Plaintiffs California Association of Dispensing Opticians (CADO) et al., sought to enjoin defendants Pearle Vision Center, Inc. (Pearle) et al., from violating California statutes regulating the practice of dispensing opticians, optometrists and optical suppliers. The California State Board of Optometry (Board) intervened as a plaintiff in CADO’s lawsuit. A temporary restraining order was issued enjoining Pearle from operating several retail optician outlets without a license, engaging in certain types of advertising and con- tinning solicitation of optometrists to purchase retail optometric franchises. After a contested hearing a preliminary injunction was granted enjoining Pearle:

The preliminary injunction was conditioned upon the posting of a bond. Pearle sought a writ of supersedeas and prohibition from this court. After a review of the supersedeas documents and petition this court summarily denied the petition. Pearle appeals the order granting the preliminary injunction.

Facts

CADO is a nonprofit corporation whose members are licensed by the State of California as registered dispensing opticians. Coplaintiff Pacific Coast Contact Lens Society is a nonprofit…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.