Curdts v. S. C. Tax Commission

127 S.E. 438, 131 S.C. 362, 1925 S.C. LEXIS 134
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedApril 1, 1925
Docket11732
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 127 S.E. 438 (Curdts v. S. C. Tax Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Curdts v. S. C. Tax Commission, 127 S.E. 438, 131 S.C. 362, 1925 S.C. LEXIS 134 (S.C. 1925).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Watts.

“These cases were brought to test the validity of the Act of March 26, 1923,. which imposes a tax upon places of amusement. By agreement with the Attorney General, the decision in this case was to be binding upon all places in the state in like situation. The issue raised is a clear challenge to the constitutionality of the act.
“It is maintained in the exceptions that the act is unconstitutional in four particulars: First, that it is a special law where a general law would suffice; second, that the tax is not uniform and equal; third, that it is a taking of property without due process of law as inhibited by^" the State Constitution; and, fourth, a violation' of the due process clause of the United States Constitution.”

These exceptions are overruled under the authority of Budd v. State of New York, 145 U. S., 517; 12 S. Ct., 468; 36 L. Ed., 247, and for the further reason that it was clearly the intent of the Legislature, in passing the act in question, that if the proviso was declared by the Court to be unconstitutional that the remainder of the act should remain unaffected. A reading of the act clearly indicates this.

All exceptions.are overruled, and judgment affirmed.

Messrs. Justices Fraser and Marion concur. Mr. ChiEE Justice Gary and Mr. Justice Coti-iran did not participate.

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

Related

State Ex Rel. Roddey v. BYRNES, GOVERNOR
66 S.E.2d 33 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1951)
Fox Bakersfield Theatre Corp. v. City of Bakersfield
222 P.2d 879 (California Supreme Court, 1950)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
127 S.E. 438, 131 S.C. 362, 1925 S.C. LEXIS 134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curdts-v-s-c-tax-commission-sc-1925.