Legal Opinion

McNeill v. Town of Whiteville

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 3, 1923PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtOlark, C. J.

It bas been beld in this Court on numerous occasions that water and sewerage bonds are for a necessary expense, and as sucb can be issued without the approval of tbe voters. Swindell v. Belhaven, 173 N. C., 1. This principle bas not been changed by cbajoter 106, Extra Session 1921. It is true that section 2943 of said chapter does not specifically mention sewerage bonds in naming the deductions to be considered in arriving at the net indebtedness of a municipality; but it does include in said section 2943 (b) in “the deductions to be made from gross debt in computing net debt,” among the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Swindell v. Town of BelhavenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. George v. City of Asheville, N. C.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1935
  2. Lamb v. City of RandlemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API