# Frink v. Prod

> California Supreme Court · April 8, 1982 · 31 Cal. 3d 166

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9630497

## Case

- **Full name:** HELENE FRINK, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. GERALD PROD, as Director, Etc., Defendant and Respondent
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** April 8, 1982
- **Citations:** 31 Cal. 3d 166; 181 Cal. Rptr. 893; 643 P.2d 476; 1982 Cal. LEXIS 169
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Mosk
- **Judges:** Broussard, Mosk, Newman
- **Cited by:** 104 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/9630497

## Opinion text

MOSK, J.
J. — I concur.
I agree with the conclusion of the majority for the reasons expressed more than a decade ago in my concurring opinion in Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 161 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 234 , 481 P.2d 242 ], Although Bixby involved a professional license, my point that an applicant and a licensee should be measured by the same standard was sound then, and it is equally sound here as adapted to the qualifications of an allegedly permanently disabled person applying for public assistance.
Bird, C. J., concurred.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9630497. Public record. Not legal advice.