Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

155 Misc. 164

Campbell v. Eichert

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · decided 1935-03-21

Relies on Burks v. . Bosso · Faulkner v. Solazzi

Decided 1935-03-21

Per Curiam.

¶1A beauty parlor is not specifically mentioned in the Civil Rights Law, sections 40, 41, and is not a place of public accommodation under the common law or under the general terms of the statute. (Burks v. Bosso, 180 N. Y. 341; Gibbs v. Arras Brothers, 222 id. 332; Faulkner v. Solazzi, 79 Conn. 541; 65 A. 947.) Where it is not conducted as part of a barber shop a beauty parlor is not included in that term as used in the statute.

¶2Judgment reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and complaint dismissed on the merits, with costs.

¶3All concur; present, Lydon, Hammer and Frankentbaler, JJ.

/155/misc/164 · .json · Public domain