Legal Opinion
Suddreth v. City of Charlotte
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided November 24, 1943PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBabNhill, J.
The business of carrying passengers for hire is a privilege, the licensing, regulation, and control of which is peculiarly and exclusively a legislative prerogative. So is tbe power to regulate the use of public roads and street?. The General Assembly in the exercise of this police power may provide for the licensing of taxicabs and regulate their use on public streets, or it may, in its discretion, delegate this authority to the several municipalities. 37 Am. Jur., 534, sec. 21; Anno. 144 A. L. R., 1120.
It has adopted the latter course. Section 2, chapter 639, Public Laws of 1943, reads as…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Auto Transit Co. v. City of Ft. WorthCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
- Turner v. . New BernSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
- Soon Hing v. CrowleySupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Thompson v. Town of LumbertonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
- Holmes v. Railroad CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Town of Emerald Isle Ex Rel. Smith v. StateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
- State v. ScogginSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- Yellow Cab Taxi Service v. City of Twin FallsIdaho Supreme Court · 1948
- D & W, INC. v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- King v. Town of Chapel HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2014
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.