Clinard v. City of Winston-Salem
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.
Tbe question for decision is wbetber reciprocal inhibitions of occupancy of residential districts by members of tbe white and Negro races, fairly apportioned, but admittedly invalid if they stood alone, may be inserted in a general zoning ordinance adopted under authority of cb. 250, Public Laws of 1923. We think not. Tbe law will not permit the indirect accomplishment of that which it directly forbids. Glenn v. Comrs. of Durham, 201 N. C., 233, 159 S. E., 439.
The precise question seems to be one of first impression, certainly in this jurisdiction, albeit some of the cases speak of…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Buchanan v. WarleySupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Missouri Ex Rel. Gaines v. CanadaSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Otis v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Booth v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Shelley v. KraemerSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Schloss v. JamisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- Roller v. AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- City of Birmingham v. MonkCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1951
- City of Raleigh v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.