Legal Opinion · Dissent

City of Columbia v. Putnam

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided October 4, 1962No. 17970Published

1DissentBussey, Justice

(dissenting.)

I regret that I find myself unable to agree with the conclusions reached in the opinion of Mr. Chief Justice TAYLOR.

Considering the entire record herein, there is, to my mind, at least a serious question as to the constitutionality of the ordinance when applied to the particular company. However, under the rule that we should refrain from passing upon a constitutional question unless such is necessary to a decision, I refrain from discussing all of the facts and address my remarks only to appellant’s exception number two, which reads as follows:

“His Honor erred in not holding…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Greenville Baseball, Inc. v. Bearden, SheriffSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1942
  2. Darling v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1872
  3. Pee Dee Chair Co. v. City of CamdenSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1932
  4. Southern Fruit Co., Inc. v. PorterSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1938
  5. Triplett v. City of ChesterSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1946

2 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