 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Lochner v. New York, No. 292,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, April 17, 1905
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The state supreme court, which found that the employer allowed his employee, a baker, to work more than 60 hours in one week in violation of 1897 N.Y. Laws art. 8, ch. 415, ¿ 110, upheld the labor law as a constitutional exercise of the state's police power. The United States Supreme Court reversed. The general right to make a contract in relation to one's business, and the right to purchase or to sell labor, was part of the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The statute was not necessary as a health law to safeguard the public health or the health of the individuals who labored as bakers. The trade of a baker was not an unhealthy one to such a degree that would authorize the legislature to interfere with the right to labor and the right of free contract on the part of the individual. Various regulations already governed the cleanliness of the quarters in which bakeries were to be conducted. Restricting the number of hours that a baker could work would not further the purpose of those regulations. It was not possible to discover the connection between the number of hours a baker could work and the quality of the bread that he produced.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
