Legal Opinion

Ex parte Baker

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided November 7, 1934No. 17308Published

1Opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.

LATTIMORE, Judge.

In its motion for rehearing respondent seems not to have apprehended our opinion. We did not hold that the ordinance in question was void because it sought to impose an occupation tax upon relator. Our opinion is based on our conclusion that the effect of said ordinance was to forbid the relator the right to sell his products within the city limits of Temple, Texas, without procuring a license, the imposition of which license fee had no other or better reason than that relator did not operate a regularly established store or warehouse in Temple, and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Gerard v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932
  2. Ex Parte BradshawCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1913
  3. Mims v. City of Fort WorthCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1933
  4. City of San Antonio v. TeagueCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API