City of Frankfort v. Miller

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

City of Frankfort v. Miller

253 S.W.2d 20, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1059

DecidedNovember 21, 1952

StatusPublished

This text of 253 S.W.2d 20 (City of Frankfort v. Miller) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Frankfort v. Miller, 253 S.W.2d 20, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1059 (Ky. Ct. App. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

COMBS, Justice.

The City council of Frankfort has enacted an ordinance, Section 1 of which provides:

“That all restaurants, soft drink stands and like places of business dealing in soft drinks and bottle goods, exclusive of gasoline filling stations, lying outside the business district of the City, as herein defined, shall be required to close such business establishments between the hours of 12:00 o’clock midnight and 5:00 o’clock A. M.”

The appellees, who operate a restaurant outside the business district, question the constitutionality of the ordinance. The lower court held that it “Contains an unreasonable and unwarranted discrimination against the plaintiffs and all other persons similarly situated by reason of the exclusion from the operation and effect of said ordinance of gasoline filling stations * * *, and that the same constitutes a denial to the plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed to them by Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.” We agree.

It is common knowledge that many filling stations sell soft drinks, and many of them sell some form of food. Under this ordinance a restaurant owner who operates a filling station in connection with his restaurant would be permitted to remain open until 2 o’clock, while his competitor across the street, who has no filling station, would be required to close at 12. Manifestly, the ordinance is discriminatory.

For a discussion of ordinances of a similar nature which have been condemned, see Tolliver v. Blizzard, 143 Ky. 773, 137 S.W. 509, 34 L.R.A.,N.S., 890; City of Louisville v. Kuhn, 284 Ky. 684, 145 S.W. 2d 851; City of Harlan v. Scott, 290 Ky. 585, 162 S.W.2d 8; City of Jackson v. Murray-Reed-Slone & Co., 297 Ky. 1, 178 S.W.2d 847.

Other questions relating to the constitutionality of the ordinance are reserved.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

COMBS, Justice.

The City council of Frankfort has enacted an ordinance, Section 1 of which provides:

“That all restaurants, soft drink stands and like places of business dealing in soft drinks and bottle goods, exclusive of gasoline filling stations, lying outside the business district of the City, as herein defined, shall be required to close such business establishments between the hours of 12:00 o’clock midnight and 5:00 o’clock A. M.”

The appellees, who operate a restaurant outside the business district, question the constitutionality of the ordinance. The lower court held that it “Contains an unreasonable and unwarranted discrimination against the plaintiffs and all other persons similarly situated by reason of the exclusion from the operation and effect of said ordinance of gasoline filling stations * * *, and that the same constitutes a denial to the plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed to them by Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.” We agree.

It is common knowledge that many filling stations sell soft drinks, and many of them sell some form of food. Under this ordinance a restaurant owner who operates a filling station in connection with his restaurant would be permitted to remain open until 2 o’clock, while his competitor across the street, who has no filling station, would be required to close at 12. Manifestly, the ordinance is discriminatory.

For a discussion of ordinances of a similar nature which have been condemned, see Tolliver v. Blizzard, 143 Ky. 773, 137 S.W. 509, 34 L.R.A.,N.S., 890; City of Louisville v. Kuhn, 284 Ky. 684, 145 S.W. 2d 851; City of Harlan v. Scott, 290 Ky. 585, 162 S.W.2d 8; City of Jackson v. Murray-Reed-Slone & Co., 297 Ky. 1, 178 S.W.2d 847.

Other questions relating to the constitutionality of the ordinance are reserved.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 S.W.2d 20, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1059, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-frankfort-v-miller-kyctapp-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack