Legal Opinion
Mitchell v. City of Birmingham
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided March 5, 1931No. 6 Div. 832PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBouldin, J.
The sole question presented is: Must section 904 of the Municipal Code of the city oi Birmingham, prohibiting the business or practice of fortune-telling or palmistry for reward, be declared invalid because in violation of section 89 of the Constitution of Alabama?
This section reads: “The legislature shall not have power to authorize any municipal corporation to pass any laws inconsistent with the general laws of the state.”
The general revenue law of the state prescribes a license: “For each fortune teller, palmist, clairvoyant, fifty dollars.” Revenue Code of 1929, p. 259, Schedule 73.
Is the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- License Tax CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- United States v. YuginovichSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- United States v. StafoffSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Ex parte CowertSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Commonwealth v. EllisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Patricia Moore-King v. County of Chesterfield, VACourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2013
- Harper v. City of Wichita FallsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
- City of Birmingham v. Hood-Mcpherson Realty Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1937
- Ott v. MoodySupreme Court of Alabama · 1968
- State Ex Rel. Woodruff v. CentanneSupreme Court of Alabama · 1956
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.