Shelnutt v. City Council of Augusta
This text of 136 S.E. 446 (Shelnutt v. City Council of Augusta) 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.
Opinions
1. The City of Augusta is expressly authorized by its charter to levy “a license tax upon any occupation, trade, or business carried on” within said city. Ga. Laws 1896, p. 119.
(а) The city may make reasonable classifications, but the tax must be uniform upon all falling within the same class. City Council of Augusta v. Clark, 124 Ga. 254 (52 S. E. 881).
(б) The validity of an occupation tax depends upon whether it is confiscatory and oppressive upon the class designated. Postal Telegraph &c. Co. v. Cordele, 141 Ga. 658, 665 (82 S. E. 26) ; Ray v. Tallapoosa, 142 Ga. 799 (83 S. E. 938); Adams Motor Co. v. Cler, 149 Ga. 818 (102 S. E. 440) ; Wright v. Hirsch, 155 Ga. 229 (116 S. E. 795).
2. The tax ordinance is not unconstitutional for any reason assigned.
3. The evidence did not require a finding that the ordinance was administered in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner.
4. The ordinance is not in restraint of trade, and is not void on that account. City of Emporia v. Endelman, 75 Kan. 428 (89 Pac. 685).
5. The prayer for relief from prosecution in the recorder’s court was withdrawn.
6. The court did not err in refusing the injunction.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
136 S.E. 446, 163 Ga. 502, 1927 Ga. LEXIS 15, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shelnutt-v-city-council-of-augusta-ga-1927.