Home/Supreme Court of North Carolina/Angelo v. City of Winston-Salem

Angelo v. City of Winston-Salem

136 S.E. 489, 193 N.C. 207, 52 A.L.R. 663, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 302
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJanuary 26, 1927
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 136 S.E. 489 (Angelo v. City of Winston-Salem) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Angelo v. City of Winston-Salem, 136 S.E. 489, 193 N.C. 207, 52 A.L.R. 663, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 302 (N.C. 1927).

Opinion

Clarkson, J.

The charter of the city of Winston-Salem (chapter 180, Private Laws 1915, sec. 44), provides: “The board of aldermen shall have the power to enact ordinances in such form as they may deem advisable, as follows: ... To establish, regulate and control the markets or market building; to fix the location of any market building, prescribe the time and manner and place within the city wherein marketable articles, such as meats, perishable vegetables, fish, game, and all other kinds of perishable food or diet shall be bought or sold: . . . On behalf of the general welfare of the city of Winston-Salem, and for the good order and government thereof, the board of aldermen may, in addition to the foregoing powers, pass or ordain any resolution or ordinance, and enforce the same by proper punishment or penalty, which it may consider wise or proper, not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the State.” O. S., 2674, 2787, sec. 20, 2791, 2794.

The ordinance of Winston-Salem, enacted 18 June, 1926, is as follows: “Section 630. Adopted 18 June, 1926. B-3827.

“Be it ordained, (a) That, for the protection of the public health, and in order to facilitate inspection of fresh meats and sea-food, for the enforcement of sanitary regulations, and for the general welfare of the community, it shall be unlawful for any person to sell or offer or expose for sale at retail any fresh meats or fowl, as defined in section 499 of the general ordinances, or fish, oysters or other fre'sh sea-food, but not including wild game, at any place within that portion of the city hereinafter described, except at a stall or stand in the city market at the corner of Sixth and Cherry streets, duly licensed for that purpose, (b) That this section shall apply to the following territory (estimated from record by court) : Such area extending approximately four-fifths of a mile from the new city market in every direction, and containing an area of 2.1 square miles.- The total area of the city is 12.33 square miles, (c) That this section shall not affect or modify the provisions of sections 500 and 503 of the general ordinances, relating to the sale of fresh meats at wholesale, the sale as a whole of calves, hogs, goats or *209 sheep, and the sale of sausage and other meat products as therein provided. (d) That this section shall be in effect from and after 1 December, 1926.”

The defendants allege and contend, in substance: That prior to 1 July, 1925, the city maintained a public market at the old city hall on Fourth and Main streets. This market had become inadequate, and the city undertook the erection of a new and adequate municipal market, completing the same 1 July, 1925, at the following cost:

Grounds.............. $133,787.00 Buildings ....................................................... 224,813.19 Equipment ........................................................ 88,819.56
Total........................................................$447,419.75

This market building is splendidly designed and equipped. It is located on a lot 175 feet by 420 feet. It is built of brick and concrete, of fireproof construction. It is approximately 100 feet wide and 245 deep. The grounds are equipped with refrigerators and refrigerator counters for meat markets, an adequate number of stalls equipped as fish markets, and an adequate number of grocery and provision stalls. It also contains ample space to meet all needs for a long time to come. The offices of the meat inspectors of the city are located ón the main floor of the market building. The basement of the market contains storage rooms and refrigerating and heating equipment. It contains a modern ammonia-compressor refrigerating system which will maintain low. temperature in every refrigerator and refrigerator counter in the market, with which each market stand in the market is equipped. The photographs filed as exhibits, showing the exterior and interior and equipment of the market building, fully corroborate the above statements.

The market building is conveniently and centrally located. It is located as nearly in the center of the city as it is possible for it to be, on Sixth and Cherry streets, each of which are 60 feet in width, which is the width of all business streets in the city of 'Winston-Salem. It is within' one block of the Eobert E. Lee Hotel; within two blocks of the eighteen-story Nissen building, the largest building in the city; one and one-half blocks of North Liberty Street, one of the most important streets in the city of Winston-Salem, on which is located a street car line; and three and one-half blocks from the courthouse square.

The rentals for spaces in the market have been fixed by the board of aldermen at fair and reasonable rates. Efficient management has been provided for the market. Eeasonable and proper ordinances for the

*210

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Roller v. Allen
96 S.E.2d 851 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1957)
Kinney v. Sutton
53 S.E.2d 306 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1949)
Rosser v. . Matthews
6 S.E.2d 849 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)
Hinkle v. . Scott
191 S.E. 512 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1937)
Walker v. Town of Faison
163 S.E. 875 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1932)
Simms v. O. L. Crigler Co.
47 S.W.2d 686 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1931)
Talking Pictures Corp. v. . Elect. Research Products
159 S.E. 19 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
General Talking Pictures Corp. v. Electrical Research Products, Inc.
201 N.C. 143 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
Roebuck v. . Carson
149 S.E. 691 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1929)
Latham v. . Harris
139 S.E. 773 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
136 S.E. 489, 193 N.C. 207, 52 A.L.R. 663, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 302, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/angelo-v-city-of-winston-salem-nc-1927.