Lisenba v. Griffin

Decision Date14 May 1942
Docket Number7 Div. 665.
PartiesLISENBA et al. v. GRIFFIN et al.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Rains & Rains, of Gadsden, for appellants.

Hood Inzer, Martin & Suttle, of Gadsden, for appellees.

BROWN, Justice.

This appeal is from a final decree of the circuit court of Etowah County, sitting in equity, declaring void an ordinance of the City of Gadsden creating "A City Barber Board" consisting of three members "all of whom must have followed the occupation of barbering in the City of Gadsden Etowah County, Alabama, for at least three (3) years immediately prior to their appointment." The appointments to be made "from a list of names submitted to said Commission from the Journeymen and Boss Barbers' organizations." The ordinance prescribing and defining the power and jurisdiction of the board. The ordinance was adopted, according to its recitals "pursuant to the application of not less than 70 per cent of the barbers operating in the City of Gadsden."

The bill is filed by appellees, under the Declaratory Judgment Act, Code 1940, Tit. 7, § 156 et seq., against the City of Gadsden, the City Barber Board, and the three individuals constituting the same, and alleges that complainants each own and operate a barber shop in the City of Gadsden; that said ordinance conflicts with the general laws of the State, and that the City Commission of the City of Gadsden was without authority to enact said ordinance, and is in conflict with the Bill of Rights and seeks to deprive complainants of their liberty to work in the prosecution of a private business, to regulate their hours of work and fix the price of their services to their customers.

Said ordinance provides, inter alia:

"The facts, policies and purposes herein set out and the provisions and regulations hereof are declared to be enacted in the interest of the public health, public safety and general welfare. The occupation of barbering and the operation of barber shops in the City of Gadsden is hereby declared to be affected with the public interest, and to facilitate supervision of such shops as now prescribed by law and the rules and regulations promulgated by the City Barber Board pursuant thereto and will thereby tend to protect the health and safety of the public and protect barbers apprentices, and others connected with the occupation of barbering, from long, unreasonable and unhealthful hours of service and from inadequate means of complying with health regulations. * * *

"'Licensee' shall mean any person who works at the occupation of barbering for compensation, whether employer or employee or as an apprentice; it shall have the meaning now defined by law and hereby adopted for the purpose of interpreting this Ordinance.

"The terms 'public barber shop' and 'barber shop' and 'establishment,' as used in this Ordinance, shall be taken to mean and include all such premises as are commonly known by the term 'barber shop' and shall include all premises or portions thereof wherein the business of shaving, clipping, cutting, trimming, singeing shampooing, massaging, manicuring the human hair, face, scalp, or hands is conducted for a fee, charge or hire. * * *

"If the board shall find, after investigation, that the minimum prices fixed in the City of Gadsden are insufficient to provide adequate service and/or facilities for protecting the public health and safety, the board may present to the City Commission its findings and recommendations and suggestions concerning said findings, and if approved and concurred with, the City Commission may be resolution or other official act require a revision of the scale of prices originally fixed by the licensees affected thereby and by official order change or vary the scale of prices as aforementioned. * * *

"The owner, manager or operator of, and every barber employed or working in, any barber shop, college or school, or other establishment where barber services are furnished or offered to the public, shall observe and comply with each of the sections of this Ordinance and every part thereof in operating or working in any such place. * * *

"Every shop shall be supplied with an adequate supply of both hot and cold running water which must be connected with the city system. If city water system is not available, then a tank or gravity pressure container must be used.

"If the city sewage system is available it must be used; if not available, a drainage system leading from the building must be installed.

"Combs and brushes must be cleaned, then immersed in a one to one thousand solution of bichloride of mercury, or some equally effective disinfectant for at least three minutes after the use of said articles upon a patron. Combs must be left in the disinfecting solution at all times when not being used."

Said ordinance makes many other provisions regulating sanitation and health, covered by Title 22, §§ 60-71 et seq., Code of 1940.

The ordinance confers on said City Barber Board among others, the following powers and duties:

"The City Barber Board shall adopt and enforce all rules and orders necessary to carry out the provisions of this Ordinance. All rules and orders of the Board shall be printed and posted for public inspection in the office of the Secretary of the City Barber...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Donoghue v. Bunkley
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • February 28, 1946
    ... ... 248; Klein v. Jefferson Bldg. & Loan ... Ass'n, 239 Ala. 460, 195 So. 593; Thompson v. Chilton ... County, 236 Ala. 142, 181 So. 701; Lisenba v ... Griffin, 242 Ala. 679, 8 So.2d 175 ... Following ... this line of reasoning, we have considered this form of ... remedy as ... ...
  • State v. Polakow's Realty Experts
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • October 22, 1942
    ... ... to its constitutionality. Then it is a question for judicial ... determination. Lisenba et al. v. Griffin et al., 242 ... Ala. 679, 8 So.2d 175; Tyson & Bro. United Theatre Ticket ... Offices, Inc. v. Banton, District Attorney, et ... ...
  • USA Oil Corp. v. City of Lipscomb
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • September 12, 1974
    ...any person from allowing any obstruction on his premises whereby free drainage of surface water was prevented. In Lisenba v. Griffin, 242 Ala. 679, 8 So.2d 175, this court affirmed a judgment holding invalid a city ordinance creating a city barber board and regulating barber On the authorit......
  • Simonetti, Inc. v. State ex rel. Gallion, 6 Div. 415
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • June 29, 1961
    ...perhaps, recognizing the divergence in the 'public interest' concepts exemplified in the McDowell and Olsen cases. 'In Lisenba vs. Griffin, 242 Ala. 679, 8 So.2d 175, the Supreme Court held that a municipal ordinance authorizing a board to fix minimum prices for the services of barbers was ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT