Town of Opp v. Donaldson

163 So. 332, 230 Ala. 689, 1935 Ala. LEXIS 315
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedJune 27, 1935
Docket4 Div. 824.
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 163 So. 332 (Town of Opp v. Donaldson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Town of Opp v. Donaldson, 163 So. 332, 230 Ala. 689, 1935 Ala. LEXIS 315 (Ala. 1935).

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

The question presented on this appeal was embraced in the opinion in In re Opinion of the Justices, 226 Ala. 570, 148 So. Ill, and there given careful and deliberate consideration. The conclusion was announced that a plan, such as attempted by the town of Opp in the instant case, created a debt and violated sections 222 and 225 of our Constitution. See, also, In re Opinion of the Justices, 228 Ala. 140, 152 So. 901; Oppenheim v. City of Florence, 229 Ala. 50, 155 So. 859; Bankhead v. Town of Sulligent, 229 Ala. 45, 155 So. 869, 96 A. L. R. 1381; Smith v. Town of Guin, 229 Ala. 61, 155 So. 865.

We have re-examined the question in the light of the argument here presented. And we may add that some of the authorities now stressed upon our attention had been previously examined and duly considered in consultation, but no occasion' has arisen for their discussion or differentiation. In large part they may be found noted in 72 A. L. R. 698, and the numerous authorities representing conflicting views are found noted in the more recent case of State v. City of Miami, 113 Fla. 280, 152 So. 6, 11. In view of our conclusion in the instant case no good purpose would be subserved by doing so now. Suffice it to say we are persuaded of the correctness of our former views, and that the decree should be affirmed.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and BOULDIN, BROWN, and FOSTER, JJ., concur. GARDNER and THOMAS, JJ., dissent. KNIGHT,- J., not sitting.

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

Related

Eagerton v. Second Econ. Dev. Coop. Dist.
909 So. 2d 783 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 2005)
Water Works Board of City of Leeds v. Huffstutler
299 So. 2d 268 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1974)
Opinion of the Justices No. 183
178 So. 2d 76 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1965)
Taxpayers and Citizens v. Town of Georgiana
93 So. 2d 493 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1956)
Williams v. Water Works and Sanitary Sewer Board
74 So. 2d 814 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1954)
City of Mobile v. Board of Water & Sewer Com'rs
64 So. 2d 824 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1953)
Opinion of the Justices
42 So. 2d 348 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1949)
Fuller v. City of Cullman
27 So. 2d 203 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1946)
Norton v. Lusk
26 So. 2d 849 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1946)
Chamberlain v. Board of Commissioners
11 So. 2d 724 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1943)
Miller v. Head
198 S.E. 680 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1938)
Harman v. Alabama College
177 So. 747 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1937)
Randall v. State Ex Rel. City of Tuskegee
172 So. 277 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
163 So. 332, 230 Ala. 689, 1935 Ala. LEXIS 315, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/town-of-opp-v-donaldson-ala-1935.