Legal Opinion · Dissent

O'GRADY v. City of Hoover

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided December 31, 1987No. 86-1243Published

1Dissent

The majority opinion concedes that the financial instruments in question have most of the attributes of bonds. However, it seems to conclude that they are not bonds, simply because they are non-negotiable under the law of commercial paper, and therefore are not within the operation of § 222, because § 222 refers only to bonds. Rather than blindly relying on the law of commercial paper to control whether the instrument in question is a "bond," as that word is used in § 222, I would look to the context in which the word was used and to the intent and purpose of § 222.

I must acknowledge, before…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Chicot County Drainage District v. Baxter State BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. Norton v. Shelby CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  3. Child Labor Tax CaseSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  4. State Ex Rel. Washington State Finance Committee v. MartinWashington Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Chicago, Indianapolis & Louisville Railway Co. v. HackettSupreme Court of the United States · 1913

7 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