Capitol Distributing Co. v. Redwine
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Candler, Justice.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) There is set out above a copy of the enrolled act as attached to and made a part of the petition as amended. As enrolled the act shows on its face that taxation on wines is included in the title and in the body. The plaintiffs in error contend that there were irregularities during the process of the legislation such as to controvert any valid reference to wines in the title. A portion of the petition as amended alleges in substance that the words, “to increase the excise taxes upon domestice wines, foreign wines, and domestic and foreign…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- United States v. Frankfort Distilleries, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Mahoney v. Joseph Triner Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Indianapolis Brewing Co. v. Liquor Control CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Mechanics Universal Joint Co. v. CulhaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Carroll v. WrightSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Lutz v. ForanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1993
- WILLIAMS v. DEKALB COUNTYSupreme Court of Georgia · 2020
- Cook v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1964
- Richmond County v. PierceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1975
- Battallia v. City of ColumbusCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1991
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.