# In Re Porterfield

> California Supreme Court · April 30, 1946 · 28 Cal. 2d 91

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9529029

## Case

- **Full name:** In Re JAMES PORTERFIELD, on Habeas Corpus
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** April 30, 1946
- **Citations:** 28 Cal. 2d 91; 168 P.2d 706; 167 A.L.R. 675; 19 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2585; 1946 Cal. LEXIS 197
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Spence
- **Judges:** Schauer, Spence
- **Cited by:** 112 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9529029

## Opinion text

SPENCE, J.
I concur in the judgment discharging petitioner. I am entirely in accord with the conclusion stated by Mr. Justice Schauer that “the portions of the ordinance, *121 purporting to establish the standards upon which the licensing board shall act, are, as enacted, arbitrarily prohibitive of certain of petitioner’s constitutionally guaranteed rights”; and I am further in agreement with much that is said in the opinion in support of the conclusion. If it may be implied, however, from the extended discussion of the several points considered in the opinion, that there are obstacles, constitutional or otherwise, to any and every form of reasonable regulation by municipal authorities of the occupation in which petitioner is engaged, I am not prepared to join in any portions of the opinion which may carry such implication.
Edmonds, J., and Shenk, J., concurred.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9529029. Public record. Not legal advice.