Legal Opinion
Boyd v. Allen
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided May 1, 1957No. 456PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtParker, J.
Under its inherent police power the State of North Carolina has the right to prohibit, regulate or restrain the use, manufacture and sale of beer within its bounds. S. v. Kittelle, 110 N.C. 560, 569, 15 S.E. 103; Bailey v. Raleigh, 130 N.C. 209, 41 S.E. 281; S. v. Williams, 146 N.C. 618, 61 S.E. 61; 30 Am. Jur., Intoxicating Liquors, sec. 22; 48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors, sec. 33. The liquor business “stands, by universal consent, in a class peculiarly within the police power.” Blackman Health Resort v. Atlanta, 151 Ga. 507, 107 S.E. 525, 17 A.L.R. 516.
A retail beer permit grants the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Sandstrom v. California Horse Racing BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Perry v. Oregon Liquor Control CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1947
- Bradley v. Texas Liquor Control BoardCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
- Cornell v. ReillyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- State v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- National Food Stores v. North Carolina Board of Alcoholic ControlSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- All Brand Importers, Inc. v. Department of Liquor ControlSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Gardner v. City of ReidsvilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- D & W, INC. v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- Underwood v. State Board of Alcoholic ControlSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.