Brown

NAT. ASS'N OF OPTOMETRISTS & OPTICIANS v. Brown

Good Law
709 F. Supp. 2d 968
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 28, 2010CIV. S-02-1464 LKK/DADCalifornia4,547 words

Opinion

Opinion

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON, Senior District Judge.

This case concerns the constitutionality of certain California statutes and regulations. These statutes and regulations prohibit optical companies from offering prescription eyewear at the same location in which eye examinations are provided and from advertising that eyewear and eye examinations were available in the same location. Plaintiffs, an association of optometrists and opticians and two out-of-state optical companies, contend that these statutes and regulations violate the dormant Commerce Clause because their burden on interstate commerce excessively outweighs the local benefits of the law. Plaintiffs and defendants each bring cross-motions for summary judgment. For the reasons described below, plaintiffs' motion is denied and defendants' motion is granted.

In 2002, plaintiffs, the National Association of Optometrists and Opticians ("NAOO") and two out-of-state optical companies, LensCrafters, Inc. ("LensCrafters") and Eye Care Centers of America, Inc. ("ECCA"), filed a complaint against defendants, the Attorney General of California and the Director of the California Department of Consumer Affairs, seeking declaratory and…

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.