City of Duluth v. Rosenblum

230 N.W. 830, 180 Minn. 352, 1930 Minn. LEXIS 1240
Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided May 16, 1930·No. No. 27,786.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Wilson, C. J.

Defendant appealed from a judgment of conviction of the offense of operating as a transient merchant in Duluth without hrst having obtained the license so to do. He operated as a wholesale dealer in fruit and produce.

A local ordinance required the payment of $25 per day as a license fee. The amount is uniform per day, Avhether the applicant seeks to operate a day, Aveek, month or year. The ordinance is not concerned with the amount of business done, nor does it seem to have any reference to the cost of issuing the license and the’ possible amount of police supervision required. The authorities are collated in the briefs.

We are of the opinion and hold that the ordinance is void because the amount of the license fee is unreasonably high.

Reversed.

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

City of Duluth v. Rosenblum, 230 N.W. 830, 180 Minn. 352, 1930 Minn. LEXIS 1240 (Mich. 1930).

230 N.W. 830 (City of Duluth v. Rosenblum) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Covington Bridge Commission v. City of Covington
79 S.W.2d 216 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1934)