Legal Opinion

Armstrong v. Board of Commissioners

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 9, 1923PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHoice, J.

Our Constitution, Art. II, sec. 29, prohibits the enactment of any local, private, or special statute concerning various specified subjects, including, among others, laws appertaining to “health, sanitation, or the abatement of nuisances,” and declares that any local, private, or special act or resolution in violation of this provision shall be void. The statute under which the election was held in this ease, Public-Local Laws of Extra Session of 1920, Ch. 112, is, in our opinion, both local and special, coming directly within the constitutional inhibition, and in construing an act and…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Keith v. . LockhartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  2. School Commissioners v. Board of Aldermen & TreasurerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
  3. Brown v. Road CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
  4. Cecil v. City of High PointSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  5. Mills v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Sides v. Cabarrus Memorial Hospital, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  2. Board of Managers of the James Walker Memorial Hospital v. City of WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  3. Henderson v. . WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  4. Burleson v. . Board of AldermenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  5. Palmer v. . Haywood CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API