Syfer v. Spence

Briscoe, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an application for an injunction by the appellant against the appellees constituting the State Board of Undertakers of Maryland, to enjoin and restrain them from revoking or suspending a license which had .been issued by the board to the appellant as principal, to engage in the business of an undertaker at No. 1600 West North Avenue, in Baltimore City. The right to the relief is based upon the Act of 1902, ch. 160, as amended by the Act of 1904, ch. 389. By these Acts it will be seen the State Board of Undertakers was created, and their powers and duties fully defined and prescribed.

It appears, from an agreed statement of facts set out in the record, that on May 1st, 1904, a license or certificate was issued to the appellant for the period of one year by the board in pursuance of the provisions of the Act, in the name of Mamie Cook Syfer as a principal to engage in the business of undertaker in Baltimore City. That the licensee is doing business at No. 1600 W. North Avenue as Mamie Cook Syfer, and that the names Mamie Cook Syfer and M. Jos. Syfer appear upon the signs displayed at her place of business. It further appears that the husband of the licensee, Josiah Syfer, is licensed by the board as an assistant undertaker, but is not held out as being connected with the business of his wife as proprietor and that the name of M. Jos.

Syfer is intended to apply only to the licensee, Mrs. Mamie Cook Syfer, she having become widely known-as M. Josephine Cookj and after her marriage as M. Josephine Syfer. ⁶⁸ (Decided February 13th, 1906.) Subsequently, on the 7th of November, 1904, the board notified the appellant that unless she made her sign conform to the license as issued, it would be