August 1, 1949 Mrs. Ella Mae Murphy ODinion No, v-w9 Vice-President - - State Board of Hairdressers Re: The legality of licens- and Cosmetologists ing a portable barber Austin, Texas and beauty service which does not have a permanent buslness lo- cation. Dear Mrb e Murphy: Reference is made to your recent request which reads in part as follows: RPlease advise this department as soon as possible if we would be within the law ln licensing the Southwest Portable Barber and Beauty Service Company to operate a unit such as desaribed fn the attached aircular. “The address given on the application reads ‘Dellas hospitals and hotels’ and the question on the application blank as to ap- proximate floor space of the shop was an- swered ‘portable, on wheels O1w Sections 10 (a) and 14 (c) of Article 734b, V.P.C0, provide in part as follows: “Sec. 10. (a) 0 a . It shall be nnlawstul ror a person, firm or corporation to operate a beauty shop or a beauty school as derined in this Act unless the same is a bona fide estab- lishment with a permanent and definite loca- tion -completely and permanentlv separated by md walls with no openings from rooms used wholly or in part for residential or sleeping purposes. . . 0n “Sea. 14, (0) The establishment of’ ltin- erant shops is hereby expressly prohibited, and it shall be unlawful for any person, flnn or corporation to operate a beauty shop as de- fined in this Act, unless the same is a bona Yra o Ella liae Murphy, page 2 (V-869) lksbent .wlith+.a.permanent and aer- Any +teusc graqtfid onde~. 1 tew of tfiis’ht ‘&hall pemft the licen- .’ see to practice in only such-bona tide estab- lished bearty shop; O . em (Emphasfs added.1 Is believe under the plain provlslons of the above quoted aeations, that bsrore an applicant oan be granted a l’ioense to operate a beauty shop, he rust show she Board that he has i p’erranent anh defiiita loeatLon--,,, for suoh shop. This provlaion has remained Pn the St+t~- utas unchanged since 1933. There are several ra@sons why suoh a requirement is made, one of which Pa in order that the state Board of Cosmetologists may fnspeot saPd looation to see it it conforms to-the sanitary- rules ~ti regulations saoh as proper rentilation,lPshtPng and ~Eain8 ph; ;;$ cold water, as well as the other provfsfons OF 0 Also, if there were no definite and permaneht location for beauty shops, the State Pnspeotors aould never make proper inspections as required by law. lfora- over, to permit such a practice would amoant to nothPly more than the licensing or an itinerant shop, whioh i~i expressly prohibited under the plain provisions of th* Aot. It is apparent fram the applicant’s applioatloa that he does not have a permanent and definite looatlbn. In view of the foregoing, we agree with roar oonolusions that the State Board or Cosmetologists Ps not authorized to fssae a license to operate a beauty shop where the applPcant has no penuanent and defPnite loohtion. Section 18 of Art. 734b, V.P.C. e prorfdes fh part that: “Provided, further, that nothing in this Act shall prohibit a person lioensed under this ,Aot from perform$ng duties aa prsscribed by this Act In the honie of a castomer in cams of emergency when sent by a shop owner. o .,a We believe that the above provision tends to strengthen as in our conclusion since the Legislataro provided that in cases ot.mergencies a ~person who 9s a licensed beauty operator uy’$ertonn all the duties prescribed by this &O% in the home of any oustomer when sent by a sho However, the person pertormbg such serdoes must be a duly lfoensea opsrator and sent by a shop owner0 . Mrs a Ella Mae Murphy, page 3 (V-669) The State Boar6 ot~cosmetology is net authorized to issud’~~~licen&e to. operate a beauty shop where such shop does not have 8 permanent and definite location. Yours very truly, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS By &n& Assistant . FIRST ASSISTANT ATTOFtNEYGENERAL BA:bh: jrb