Legal Opinion

Friedman v. City of Atlanta

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided March 13, 1940No. 13065PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Atkinson, Presiding Justice.

A municipal ordinance prohibited operation of “any pin-ball machine,” and prescribed a penalty for violation of its terms. Before the date prescribed for the or*865dinance to become effective, certain owners and lessors of “pin-ball machines” instituted an action to enjoin enforcement of the ordinance, on the ground that it was ultra vires, unreasonable, and unconstitutional. The ground of complaint was that the fear of arrest would cause the lessees to terminate their contracts and cause the machines to be removed from their places of business, thereby causing…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Howard v. Briarcliff Zoological Corp.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1934
  2. Asa G. Candler Inc. v. City of AtlantaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
  3. Zaring v. AdamsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
  4. Loftis Plumbing & Heating Co. v. QuarlesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Phillips v. City of AtlantaDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1944
  2. Phillips v. City of AtlantaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1944

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API