Legal Opinion

State v. . Manuel

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 5, 1838PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

There is thus directly presented for our decision the question which was heretofore raised and argued in the case of Oxendine (ante, 2 vol., 435), but which it was then deemed neither necessary nor proper to determine, that is to say, whether the act of 1831, ch. 13 (See 1 Rev. Stat., ch. 3, secs. 86, 87, 88, 89), "to provide for the collection of fines imposed upon free negroes and free persons of color," be unconstitutional and void. Every case seriously questioning the constitutionality of a statute is entitled to the most deliberate consideration, because it invokes the exercise of the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. . GlenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1859
  2. State v. . NewsomSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1844
  3. State v. . DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880
  4. State v. . James and David McIntireSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1853
  5. State v. . RobbinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1878

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Corum v. University of North CarolinaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1992
  2. Van Der Schelling v. U. S. News & World Report, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1963
  3. State v. NealCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973
  4. Harper v. HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2022
  5. Harper v. HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2022

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API