Legal Opinion
Etheredge v. City of Norfolk
Supreme Court of Virginia
Decided September 29, 1927PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChinn, J.
The city of Norfolk is authorized by its charter to provide an “adequate water supply for said city” and “to establish, impose, and enforce water rates.”
A certain ordinance passed by the city, known as section 156 of the Norfolk City Code, 1920, reads as follows:
*798“Section 156. Both owner and occupant responsible for supply of water to premises connected with city sewer.
“The owner of any premises which are required by the city ordinances to be connected with the city sewer shall see that water from the waterworks of the city is connected with said sewerage on said premises, and not cut off…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Lochner v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Matter of Application of JacobsNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Spann v. City of DallasTexas Supreme Court · 1921
- Spann v. City of DallasTexas Supreme Court · 1921
- Hennington v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Blue Cross of Virginia v. Com.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1980
- City of Maryville v. CushmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1952
- Home Owners' Loan Corp. v. Mayor of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1939
- Whitehead v. Development CorporationSupreme Court of Virginia · 1963
- Home Owners' Loan Corp. v. Logan CityUtah Supreme Court · 1939
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.