Cornwell

Cornwell v. California Board of Barbering & Cosmetology

Good Law
962 F. Supp. 1260·97 Daily Journal DAR 10409·1997 WL 220080·1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6078
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMay 2, 1997Civil 97-0138-B(POR)California10,662 words

Opinion

Opinion

Brewster, J.

ORDERING GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AS TO PLAINTIFF AHNHCA; DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AS TO PLAINTIFF CORN-WELL; GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ 45 DAYS LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT

This matter came on regularly for hearing on defendants’ motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs are represented by David Kleinfeld and Richard Segal of Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro LLP and by Clint Bolick and Donna Matías of the Institute for Justice. Defendants are represented by Kathleen Lam, Deputy Attorney General for the State of California. After careful consideration of the moving and opposing papers, the Court hereby GRANTS defendants’ motion to dismiss as to plaintiff American Hairbraiders and Natural Hair Care Association (AHNHCA), and DENIES defendants’ motion to dismiss as to plaintiff JoAnne Cornwell.

I. Introduction

Plaintiffs Dr. JoAnne Cornwell (Dr. Corn-well) and the American Hairbraiders and Natural Hair Care Association (AHNHCA) are suing two State of California agencies and various individuals alleging that California’s licensing requirement for hairbraiders violates the due process, equal protection and privileges and immunities clauses of both the federal and California…

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.