Coggins v. Davis
This text of 174 S.E. 628 (Coggins v. Davis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. An ordinance of a municipal corporation provided that all persons resident of such municipality, who “under the laws of the State of Georgia would be liable to-perform road duty,” should be liable to pay a tax or work on the streets of such municipality; and all persons so residing, who under the State law would be subject to sucli duty, come within such ordinance, even though the citizens of the county within which such municipality is located are not subject to any road duty, by virtue of a special State law relating to the duties of the commissioners of such county.
2. The fact that such ordinance, levying a tax as set out above, is not uniformly enforced by the authorities against all persons subject thereto is no valid defense where one is prosecuted for failure to pay the tax or perform the duty specified.
3. There is no merit in the contention that such an ordinance is a revenue [797]*797measure, and that no criminal proceeding can be had to enforce the same. Johnston v. Macon, 62 Ga. 645; Whitehead v. Vienna, 10 Ga. App. 337 (73 S. E. 533).
4. Where a person refused to do the work specified in such an ordinance or to pay the tax therein set out, and was imprisoned on account thereof, such imprisonment was lawful, and there was no error in refusing to discharge the prisoner under a writ of habeas corpus. Grier v. Waycross, 49 Ga. App. — (174 S. E. 221).
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
174 S.E. 628, 178 Ga. 796, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 186, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coggins-v-davis-ga-1934.