State v. . Freeman

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . Freeman

4 S.E.2d 316, 216 N.C. 161, 1939 N.C. LEXIS 119

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedSeptember 20, 1939

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 4 S.E.2d 316 (State v. . Freeman) 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.

Bluebook

State v. . Freeman, 4 S.E.2d 316, 216 N.C. 161, 1939 N.C. LEXIS 119 (N.C. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

The motions in arrest of judgment for uncertainty in the warrants and failure to charge the defendants with the commission of a crime must be allowed on authority of S. v. Julian, 214 N. C., 574, 200 S. E., 24; S. v. Williams, 210 N. C., 159, 185 S. E., 661; and S. v. Ingle, 214 N. C., 276, 199 S. E., 10.

Our attention has been called to no statute, county or city ordinance, requiring a license, to “engage in the business of employing peddlers.” Even if it be conceded, as the State contends, that under ch. 127, Public Laws 1937 (Revenue Act), any person, firm or corporation “employing the services of another as a peddler” is made liable for the peddler’s tax therein imposed, it does not follow that the employer must obtain a license as well as the peddler employed. S. v. Smith, 211 N. C., 206, 189 S. E., 509.

Whether the defendants would be liable for failure to procure licenses for peddlers employed by them is not presented by the record.

Judgment arrested.

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

Stacy, C. J.

The motions in arrest of judgment for uncertainty in the warrants and failure to charge the defendants with the commission of a crime must be allowed on authority of S. v. Julian, 214 N. C., 574, 200 S. E., 24; S. v. Williams, 210 N. C., 159, 185 S. E., 661; and S. v. Ingle, 214 N. C., 276, 199 S. E., 10.

Our attention has been called to no statute, county or city ordinance, requiring a license, to “engage in the business of employing peddlers.” Even if it be conceded, as the State contends, that under ch. 127, Public Laws 1937 (Revenue Act), any person, firm or corporation “employing the services of another as a peddler” is made liable for the peddler’s tax therein imposed, it does not follow that the employer must obtain a license as well as the peddler employed. S. v. Smith, 211 N. C., 206, 189 S. E., 509.

Whether the defendants would be liable for failure to procure licenses for peddlers employed by them is not presented by the record.

Judgment arrested.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 S.E.2d 316, 216 N.C. 161, 1939 N.C. LEXIS 119, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-freeman-nc-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack