Legal Opinion · Dissent

Weinstein v. City of Raleigh

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 27, 1940PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1DissentBarnhill, J.

CLARKSON and DEVIN, JJ., concur in dissent. This is an action to recover $62.50 paid as a license tax upon a junk dealer, and penalties, which payment was made under protest by the plaintiffs to the defendant, heard upon an agreed statement of facts.

An ordinance of the city of Raleigh reads: "Every person engaged in the buying and/or selling of material commonly known as junk, within the city or within a two-mile radius thereof, shall be deemed a `junk dealer' within the meaning of section 168 of the State Revenue Act, and shall pay an annual license of $62.50."

Section 168 of the State…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Miller v. . ScottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Trustees of Guilford College v. Guilford CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  2. Weinstein v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  3. Buffaloe v. . BarnesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  4. Weinstein v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API