Legal Opinion
Glenn v. . Board of Education
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided October 14, 1936PublishedCited by 65 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtClarkson, J.
The court below held the act in controversy valid and sustained the contentions of defendants, and dismissed the action. We cannot so hold.
Article II, sec. 29, of the Constitution of North Carolina, in part, is as follows: “The General Assembly shall not pass any local, private, or special act or resolution, . . . changing the names of cities, towns, and townships; authorizing the laying out, opening, altering, maintaining, or discontinuing of highways, streets, or alleys; relating to ferries or bridges,” etc.
In Day v. Comrs., 191 N. C., 780 (783-4), it is said: “The first section of the act…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
- Booth v. . HairstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
- Hiatt v. City of GreensboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
- Lowe v. HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
- Sanitary District v. . PruddenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Martin v. PrestonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
- Adams v. North Carolina Department of Natural & Economic ResourcesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
- McIntyre v. ClarksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
- Williams v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of NCSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2003
- Hart v. StateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2015
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.