Flemming v. City of Asheville
This text of 167 S.E. 77 (Flemming v. City of Asheville) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Issues of fact are sharply raised by the pleadings in this action. The evidence at the hearing of the motion of plaintiffs that the temporary restraining order be made permanent, was contradictory as to material facts. No findings of fact appear in the judgment or in the record. We are unable to determine in the present state of the record upon what ground the temporary restraining order was dissolved.
A city ordinance dealing with a matter of great importance to the public as well as to operators of motor buses on the streets of the towns and cities of this State, is involved in this action. The validity of the ordinance is challenged on the ground that some of its terms and provisions are unconstitutional. It does not now appear that the validity of the ordinance is necessarily presented by this appeal. Goldsboro v. Supply Co., 200 N. C., 405, 157 S. E., 58, and cases cited.
The judgment is reversed and the action remanded to the Superior Court of Buncombe County, to the end that another hearing may be had. The facts on which the judgment is rendered should be found, and set out in the judgment.
Eeversed and rémanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
167 S.E. 77, 203 N.C. 810, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 432, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flemming-v-city-of-asheville-nc-1933.