Legal Opinion

State v. Kimbrough

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided June 30, 1941No. 8 Div. 155Published

1Opinion

"The legislative act in question, now appearing as Tit. 36, § 104 et seq., Code of 1940, is challenged as violative of the commerce clause of the Constitution of the United States, Article 1, § 8, cl. 3.
"In brief, the act requires all persons, including local dealers, who bring used cars into Alabama for sale, to do three things before offering same for sale:
"1. Register each car using a form provided by the Judge of Probate. The contents of this form are not specified, but left to the Judge of Probate of each county.
"2. File with the Judge of Probate a bond, with surety, approved by him, in…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bender v. ConnorDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1939
  2. Park McLain, Inc. v. HoeyDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1937
  3. State Ex Rel. Leathers v. ColemanSupreme Court of Florida · 1936
  4. State v. ErnstSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
  5. Motor Trading Co. v. IngelsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API