# Petition — J. B. K., Inc. v. Caron > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385006_1133%3A1 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Petition - **Published:** January 1, 1980 - **Citation:** 444 U.S. 1016 ## Text a Bu; j i 3 % ; ~ Y FILED t 4} oct 22 y979 WOM SGDAK, JR., CLERK In the Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 1979 J.B.K., INC., ET AL., Petitioners, VS. NORMAN CARON, ET AL., Respondents. PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT JAMES R. WYRSCH 1050 Home Savings Building 1006 Grand Avenue Kansas City, Missouri 64106 Attorney for Petitioners E. L. MENDENHALL, INc., 926 Cherry Street, Kansas City, Mo. 64106, (816) 421-3030 TABLE OF CONTENTS Opptendamns TRIO ........c.cccesssesseses.s. © SSS OEE ae 2 Jurisdiction — ............... a a sc ccastseeuasstncce 2 a _cswsiuasandaccanscescnenccee 2 The Constitutional Provisions and Statutes ................... 3 I I nr SoS csccechcneccascecocessoscaacecenccene 10 Reasons for Granting the Wit ..................c..sc.cccccsscesssssesee 15 i. ansnouncccncccccsees 15 1(a). Equal Protection Violations ............0...0....... 15 1(b). Fundamental Rights of Petitioners Were Infringed Upon by Chapter 567, R.S.Mo. 20 Discussion of Question Presented ..................:sccscceseeeeeees 24 a ssnsccnssecsctccoccecaces 32 Appendix A—Opinion of the Court of Appeals .............. Al Appendix B—Opinion of the District Court .......0..00........ A7 Appendix C—Motion for Rehearing Denied .................... A29 Table of Authorities CASES Bigelow v. Virginia, 421 U.S. 809 (1975) 2. eee 22 Buchanan v. Batcheler, 308 F.Supp. 729 (N.D. Tex. 1970), vacated and remanded on other grounds, 401 I a. sc eeasnataszeccnsccnces 23 Caesar’s Club v. St. Louis County, 565 S.W.2d 783 os sacccssacsctcsoncascocccccccnsacs 23 Cheek v. City of Charlotte, 180 S.E.2d 18 (N.C. 1968) 16 Cianciola v. Members of City Council, Knoxville, Tenn., 376 F.Supp. 719 (E.D. Tenn. 1974) 0.0... cceeccsesceseeseee 21 City and County of Denver v. Wilson, 572 P.2d 484 Naess cisssiscccsncnccnecsnescccansscaccsencecececcees 21 il Commonwealth v. Balthazar, 318 N.E.2d 478 (Mass. | LAER RA AE Rae A cD eer ele ar ELE enemy ween Ae 23 Corey v. City of Dallas, 352 F.Supp. 977 (N.D. Tex. DN Ssccsadeviaiteestacsscs coeds asec iaamsdaaietieniaauidsAaaaeagaaneniens 21, 24 Cotner v. Henry, 394 F.2d 873 (7th Cir. 1968), cert. Get Bie TI, BET CRI) ivrcsscsseccscnsevnsiincecssscasecssinnice 23 Fagden v. Linker, 365 A.2d 1947? (Pa. 1976) .............00. 22 Greene v. McElroy, 360 U.S. 474, 3 L.Ed.2d 1877 (1959) 20 Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) ....00.... 22 Gooding v. Wilson, 405 U.S. 518 (1971) .......ccccceeeeeeeeees 21 Hart Health Studio v. Salt Lake County, 577 P.2d 116 Ti ge RBA ARERR RI ited Denes FR eR oeeee Pr naDL A oon 16 Hawkins v. Superior Court, 586 P.2d 916 (Cal. 1978) 26 Hogge v. Hedrick, 391 F.Supp. 91 (E.D. Va. 1975) ........ 16 In re P., 400 N.Y.Supp.2d 455 (Fam. Ct. 1977) ....16, 19, 22 Jensen v. Salt Lake, 530 P.2d 3 (Utah 1974) ~...00000200.... 21 JSK Enterprises v. Lacey, 492 P.2d 600 (Wash. 1972) 21 Lewis v. New Orleans, 415 U.S. 130 (1974) ......... 22 Lovisi v. Slayton, 539 F.2d 349 (4th Cir. 1976) ............ 22 Mason v. Claytor, 459 F.Supp. 174 (D. D.C. 1978) ........ 20 Nyberg v. City of Virginia, 495 F.2d 1342 (8th Cir. 1975), app. dism., 419 U.S. 891 (1976) 0... 20 OPT. ©. GPE, TW Te BT CITI) vecinsecsncenssccnnsthessésecinnee 32 Parham v. Hughes, 99 S.Ct. 1742 (1979) 2... 32 Paul v. Davis, 424 U.S. 693 (1976) nce cccccesceeseees 20 People of the State of New York v. Johnson, 355 Sa SEE a 17 People of the State of New York v. Rice, 363 N.Y.S.2d eet AEAID. 90 Rin ORONO Oe REED See EO 17 People v. Williams, 286 N.Y.S.2d 575 (1967) Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92 S| FRIAR ORR RRM cerca kena Oe RAR RI EO 2 II Sax v. Breier, 384 F.Supp. 36 (E.D. Wis. 1974) ......0......... 21 Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557 (1969) oe 23 State of Iowa v. Pilcher, 249 N.W.2d 348 (Ia. 1976) .... 23 State of N.J. v. Lair, 301 A.2d 748 (N.J. 1973) ............ 23 State of Ohio v. Faulk, No. C-77486, First Appellate EIUMETICE OE GIRO (UTOIOTOIE) nccccccccccecccessecesccsccscnnseseesese 16 State v. Saunders, 381 A.2d 333 (N.J. 1977) ........cccceeeee 17 oc Wee We COPUOR, GED UW, Be CRG) ciscciscecrettacestcsttaceacceees 23 Vance v. Bradley, 99 S.Ct. 939 (1979) 2... ecceeeeee 32 Valley Health Systems, Inc. v. City of Racine, 369 PCIE. BT CRD. Wi0C. TOTB) .ncccecevccsescccssescnesencesecvsxeonss 16 Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U.S. 748 (1976) 00.00.0000... 22 Wyman v. Wallace, 549 P.2d 71 (1976) .........ceccceceseeeeees 22 CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS AND STATUTES United States Constitution— I a cahdneaamecanbbens 3, 22 MI I giccctccdistceetcnen tnsasdramecnaisetinead casccneahaisiees 22 III UII ics cscs cacatacsncuravnsesustuntiaduciecsantiaseed 20, 22 INI II | ca... crsx. cas scssshaieanastnunoaseasdamaninaunks 22 Amendment Fourteen ...................cccccccecsee 3, 15, 20, 22, 24 MII HI 55.25 sasinsty scacssncsanonasdaqsnomonceastetsnmnbioudboiasantin bit 3, 21 I ts 3, 21 NIN IIE RIES, 5hcchpcsenatulesiismnscasannndaabsiicesemacessppinesooniin 16 SII cab sstiicssasicshcasaamcoiachanssccasebiemeenilaseepe psalms 16 Chapter 567, R.S.Mo. ......... sista ntdatcemagsine 4, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21 BY SIN Ip isdccrsarvemcctdanartrnraapnensinhatetsoncihiies 4,15, 17, 21 Sie an a aa eengnasacmiamaeieeneeemmammmants 6 I arash scala steeds chest cheats eoccecsdcantoetiooedionssh tantetovaien 6 NER “RAL RO PR eee ee ae IST 7 IV foe tere bloke ee SS 7 567.060 ............ ~visuioeasetinciiganinbcia pis catalase haa 8 Ne oe caliper PA AERIS ee 8 TR BD oavsaccaceansinincestasan ecahacsietiacniaeuatiiensnken ane 8 CIE I ST AR 9 EI © scnnccscsessaéesadelneeene PPE es eS ONL ES 10 TREATISES Gunther, The Supreme Court, 1971 Term - Foreword: In Search of Evolving Doctrine on a Changing Court: A Model for a Newer Equal Protection (1972), 86 FEO U Nae, 2 ccnsnrecsvensscsisseenensatanaaa ee 26 “The First Amendment Overbreadth Doctrine,” 83 Flory dadeey. OB6 CRG) | ncccceccetie seen 22 Richardson, “Sexual Offenses Under the Proposed Mis- souri Criminal Code”, 38 Mo.L.Rev. 371 (1973) ........ 16, 19 “The Constitutional Right of Sexual Privacy,” 12 Suf- eR NB ee re 17 In the Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 1979 J.B.K., INC., ET AL., Petitioners, VS. NORMAN CARON, ET AL., Respondents. PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT Petitioners, J.B.K., Inc., d/b/a Magic Touch, Kingsmen II, d/b/a King’s Harem, S.L.S., Inc., d/b/a Relaxation Sta- tion, C-Sun, Inc., d/b/a Garden of Eden Health Spa, T.D.C., Inc., d/b/a Your Way Health Spa, L.T.D. Enterprises, d/b/a Classy Lady Health Spa, T.R.I. Company, d/b/a Afternoon Delight Health Spa, Lone-Star Enterprises, d/b/a Wild West Pleasure Palace, and Diamond Enterprises, d/b/a Fantastic Fantasy Health Spa,* petitions for a writ of certiorari to review the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in this case. *Other appellants below, namely Marilyn Schaefer, a/k/a Ann Watson, d/b/a Foxy Lady Health Spa and d/b/a Hideaway Health Club Spa; Club 107, Inc., d/b/a Club 107 and d/b/a Grandview Fitness Center; G & G Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a Unique Health Spa; E & H Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a Beaver Lodge; Franko Therapeutics, Inc., d/b/a Aristocrat House Health Spa, and Shirley Edwards, do not join in this Petition. ~ OPINIONS BELOW The opinion of the Court of Appeals (App. A, infra, pp. Al-A6) is reported at 600 F.2d 710 (8th Cir. 1979). The opinion of the District Court (App. B, pp. A7-A28) is not yet reported. JURISDICTION The judgment of the Court of Appeals was entered on June 24, 1979. Petitioner’s timely motion for rehearing or alternatively, for rehearing en banc, was denied on July 23, 1979 (App. C, infra, p. A29). This Honorable Court’s jurisdiction is invoked pursuant to 28 USC 1254 (1). QUESTION PRESENTED 1. Whether the Appellate and Trial Courts decision to deny preliminary relief in this case was bottomed upon the proper test to be employed when the facts present an issue under the Equal Protection clause of the Four- teenth Amendment to the United States Constitution: (A) Has an important question of Federal law been decided by the Court of Appeals which has not been, but should be, finally settled by this Court, to-wit: should the traditional “two-tier” analysical framework for review- ing legislative classifications under the equal protection clause be used or should Justice Marshall’s test (as ex- pressed in e.g., Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92, 95 (1972)) be used, i.e., whether there is an appropriate governmental interest suitably furthered by the differential treatment. THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS AND STATUTES U. S. Constitution, Amendment One. Amendment One Congress shall make no law .. . abridging the free- dom of speech.... U.S. Constitution, Amendment Fourteen. Amendment Fourteen Sec. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State where- in they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, with- out due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Art. I, §9, Cl. 3, U. S. Constitution. Art. I, §9 No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed. Art. I, $10, U. S. Constitution. Art. I, §10 No state shall . . . pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts. * * * Chapter 567, R.S.Mo. Sec. 567.010. 567.020. 567.030. 567.040. 567.050. 567.060. 567.070. 567.080. 567.090. 567.100. 567.010. Chapter 567 PROSTITUTION Chapter definitions. Prostitution. Patronizing prostitution. Prostitution and patronizing prostitution— sex of parties no defense, when. Promoting prostitution in the first degree. Promoting prostitution in the second degree. Promoting prostitution in the third degree. Prostitution houses deemed public nuisances. Preemption and standardization. Responsibilities of prosecuting attorneys and attorney general. Chapter definitions As used in this chapter, the following terms mean: (1) “Promoting prostitution”, a person “promotes prostitution” if, acting other than as a prostitute, or a patron of a prostitute, he knowingly (a) Causes or aids a person to commit or engage in prostitution; or (b) Procures or solicits patrons for prostitution; or (c) Provides persons or premises for prostitution purposes; or 4) (d) Operates or assists in the operation of a house of prostitution or a prostitution enterprise; or (e) Accepts or receives or agrees to accept or receive something of value pursuant to an agreement or understanding with any person whereby he par- ticipates or is to participate in proceeds of prostitution activities; or (f) Engages in any conduct designed to institute, aid or facilitate an act or enterprise of prostitution; (2) “Prostitution”, a person commits “prostitu- tion” if he engages or offers or agrees to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for some- thing of value to be received by the person or by a third person; (3) “Patronizing prostitution”, a person “patron- izes prostitution” if (a) Pursuant to a prior understanding, he gives something of value to another person as compensation for that person or a third person having engaged in sexual conduct with him or with another; or (b) He gives or agrees to give something of value to another person on an understanding that in return therefor that person or a third person will engage in sexual conduct with him or with another; or (c) He solicits or requests another person to en- gage in sexual conduct with him or with another, or to secure a third person to engage in sexual conduct with him or with another, in return for something of value; 6 (4) “Sexual conduct’ occurs when there is (a) “Sexual intercourse” which means any pene- tration, however slight, of the female sex organ by the male sex organ, whether or not an emission results; or (b) “Deviate sexual intercourse” which means any sexual act involving the genitals of one person and the mouth, tongue or anus of another person; or (c) “Sexual contact” which means any touching, manual or otherwise, of the anus or genitals of one person by another, done for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire of either party; (5) “Something of value” means any mioney or property, or any token, object or article exchangeable for money or property. L.1977, p. ........, S.B.No.60, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1979. 567.020. Prostitution 1. A person commits the crime of prostitution if he performs an act of prostitution. 2. Prostitution is a class B misdemeanor. Aalee ty Bs -.--- , ».B.No.60, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1979. 567.030. Patronizing prostitution 1. A person commits the crime of patronizing prostitution if he patronizes prostitution. 2. Patronizing prostitution is a class B misde- meanor. BREE ts BR ences. , S.B.No.60, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1979. 7 567.040. Prostitution and patronizing prostitution— sex of parties no defense, when In any prosecution for prostitution or patronizing a prostitute, the sex of the two parties or prospective parties to the sexual conduct engaged in, contemplated or solicited is immaterial, and it is no defense that (1) Both persons were of the same sex; or (2) The person who received, agreed to receive or solicited something of value was a male and the person who gave or agreed or offered to give some- thing of value was a female. Balert, M , 5.B.No.60, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1979. 567.050. Promoting prostitution in the first degree 1. A person commits the crime of promoting pros- titution in the first degree if he knowingly (1) Promotes prostitution by compelling a person to enter into, engage in, or remain in prostitution; or (2) Promotes prostitution of a person less than sixteen years old. 2. The term “compelling” includes (1) The use of forcible compulsion; (2) The use of a drug or intoxicating substance to render a person incapable of controlling his con- duct or appreciating its nature; (3) Withholding or threatening to withhold dan- gerous drugs or a narcotic from a drug dependent person. 8 3. Promoting prostitution in the first degree is a class B felony. A See , 5.B.No.60, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1979. 567.060. Promoting prostitution in the second degree 1. A person commits the crime of promoting pros- titution in the second degree if he knowingly promotes prostitution by managing, supervising, controlling or owning, either alone or in association with others, a house of prostitution or a prostitution business or enterprise involving prostitution activity by two or more prostitutes. 2. Promoting prostitution in the second degree is a class C felony. ey a , 5.B.No.60, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1979. 567.070. Promoting prostitution in the third degree 1, A person commits the crime of promoting pros- titution in the third degree if he knowingly promotes prostitution. 2. Promoting prostitution in the third degree is a class D felony. yy aan - Speen , 5.B.No.60, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1979. 567.080. Prostitution houses deemed public nuisances 1. Any room, building or other structure reg- ularly used for sexual contact for pay as defined in section 567.010 or any unlawful prostitution activity prohibited by this chapter is a public nuisance. 2. The attorney general, circuit attorney or prose- cuting attorney may, in addition to all criminal sanc- tions, prosecute a suit in equity to enjoin the nuisance. 9 If the court finds that the owner of the room, build- ing or structure knew or had reason to believe that the premises were being used regularly for sexual contact for pay or unlawful prostitution activity, the court may order that the premises shall not be occu- pied or used for such period as the court may deter- mine, not to exceed one year. 3. All persons, including owners, lessees, officers, agents, inmates or employees, aiding or facilitating such a nuisance may be made defendants in any suit to enjoin the nuisance, and they may be enjoined from engaging in any sexual contact for pay or unlaw- ful prostitution activity anywhere within the jurisdic- tion of the court. 4. Appeals shall be allowed from the judgment of the court as in other civil actions. Pe 5 a See , 9.B.No.60, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1979. 567.090. Preemption and standardization The general assembly by enacting this chapter intends to preempt any other regulation of the area covered by felony sections 567.050 through 567.070, to promote statewide control of prostitution, and to standardize laws that governmental subdivisions may adopt in other areas covered by this chapter. No governmental subdivision may enact or enforce a law that makes any conduct in the area covered by sec- tions 567.050 through 567.070 subject to a criminal or civil penalty or sanction of any kind. Cities and towns may enact and enforce laws prohibiting and penalizing conduct subject to criminal or civil penalties or sanctions under other provisions of this chapter, but the provisions of such laws shall be the same 10 and the authorized penalties or sanctions under such laws shall not be greater than those of this chapter. Cities and towns may also enact and enforce laws prohibiting and penalizing public solicitation of sexual conduct, whether or not the offer to engage in sexual conduct is in return for something of value, and health laws to prevent the spread of venereal diseases. Oy a: re , 5.B.No.60, $ 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1979. 567.100 Responsibilities of prosecuting attorneys and attorney general In addition to the responsibility of circuit attor- neys and prosecuting attorneys in their respective ju- risdictions to enforce the criminal provisions of this chapter, they shall have the duty to enforce the pro- visions of section 567.080; and the attorney general shall have a concurrent duty to enforce the civil provi- sions of section 567.080. PS a Sapore , S.B.No.60, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1979. STATEMENT OF THE CASE On December 14, 1978, Plaintiffs, all of whom are individuals and/or corporations engaged in the business of operating massage parlors in the State of Missouri, filed a verified complaint in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. Plaintiffs si- multaneously filed a motion for temporary restraining order with supporting suggestions and a motion for pre- liminary injunction, together with suggestions in support thereof. A temporary restraining order was issued, and there- after a hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction was held on January 3, 1979. 11 Prior to the hearing, the Defendants, all of whom were either state, county or local law enforcement or prose- cutorial officials in the State of Missouri, responded to the complaint, some pursuant to a formal answer, others pursuant to a motion to dismiss. Rule 12(b) (1), (6), F.R. Cw. F. A transcript of all proceedings in the lower court was made and will be filed with this Court.’ After the hearing on the motion for a temporary injunction, on Janu- ary 3, 1979, the cause was continued; and on January 9, 1979, the Court below denied the relief sought (