Barrow v. City of Bessemer

138 So. 553, 224 Ala. 48, 1931 Ala. LEXIS 26
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided December 17, 1931·No. 6 Div. 56.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

BROWN, J.

The ordinance under which Barrow was prosecuted levies a license tax against persons, firms, or corporations engaged in the business of manufacturing or bottling soft drinks, or their agents, within the corporate limits of the city of Bessemer, using the method of bottling as a basis for classification.

Applying the rule of strict construction, it is clear that selling and delivering the product is not within the purview of the ordinance. This differentiates this case from Town of Guntersville v. Wright, 223 Ala. 349, 135 So. 634, and the cases therein cited.

On the facts stated by the Court of Appeals in its opinion, the ease was properly disposed of by that court, and the writ of certiorari is due to be denied.

Writ denied.

ANDERSON, O. J., and THOMAS and KNIGHT, JJ., concur.

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

Barrow v. City of Bessemer, 138 So. 553, 224 Ala. 48, 1931 Ala. LEXIS 26 (Ala. 1931).

138 So. 553 (Barrow v. City of Bessemer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

City of Birmingham v. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co.
142 So. 55 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1932)