Legal Opinion

Armistead v. Karsch

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided March 9, 1951PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burnett

The validity of Chapter 348 and Chapter 604 of the Private Acts of 1949 is attacked in this case on the ground that the Acts contain two subjects in violation of ¡Section 17, of Article II, of the Constitution.

The caption of Chapter 348 is: “An Act to amend Chapter 246, ¡Private Acts of 1947, being An Act entitled:” Then follows the caption of Chapter 246 of the Private Acts of 1947. Then the following: “so as to consolidate certain pension funds of the City of Nashville, fix the contributions of employees thereto, and to provide certain benefits for widows of pensioned employees.”

The 1947…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Tennessee Electric Power Co. v. City of ChattanoogaTennessee Supreme Court · 1937
  2. DAVIDSON COUNTY v. ElrodTennessee Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Hays v. Federal Chemical Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Edwards v. DavisTennessee Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Clay v. BuchananTennessee Supreme Court · 1931

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Farris v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Chattanooga-Hamilton County Hospital Authority v. City of ChattanoogaTennessee Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Smith v. HansenWyoming Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Tennessee Municipal League v. ThompsonTennessee Supreme Court · 1997
  5. State ex rel. Blanton v. DurhamTennessee Supreme Court · 1975

6 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