Legal Opinion

Storm v. Town of Wrightsville Beach

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 20, 1925PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClarkson, J.

Are the purposes for which the town of Wrightsville Beach desires to issue $60,000 in bonds “necessary expenses” within the meaning of section 7 of Art. VII, of the Constitution of North Carolina? We think they are, and “a vote of the majority of the qualified voters therein” is not necessary.

The constitutional provision is as follows: “No county, city, town, or other municipal corporation shall contract any debt, pledge its faith or loan its credit, nor shall any tax be levied or collected by any officers of the same except for the necessary expenses thereof, unless by a vote of the majority…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Brown v. Road CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
  2. Glenn v. . WraySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
  3. Hightower v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
  4. Elizabeth City Water & Power Co. v. City of Elizabeth CitySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  5. Smathers v. Commissioners of Madison CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1899

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Turner v. . ReidsvilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  2. Henderson v. . WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  3. Peirson v. American Hardware Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  4. Sing v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  5. Turner v. City of ReidsvilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944

23 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