Legal Opinion

Houston County Board of Revenue v. Poyner

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 30, 1938No. 4 Div. 32PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GARDNER, Justice.

In the General Revenue Bill of 1935 (General Acts 1935, pages 256 to 574), on pages 564 and 565, are found, the follow-, ing sections:

“Section 370-A. The fees, compensations and earnings of the Judges of Probate allowed under the revenue laws of the State, shall not together with all other fees, compensations, allowances and earnings to them, exceed six thousand dollars net per annum, after the payment of the salaries for'clerks, typists, stenographers and other office expenses in Counties where the Judge of Probate is not paid a fixed salary; and the expenses.of the Office…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Ballentyne v. WickershamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
  2. Lindsay v. United States Savings & Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of Alabama · 1897
  3. Alabama State Bridge Corporation v. SmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
  4. State ex rel. Troy v. SmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1914
  5. City Council v. National Building & Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of Alabama · 1895

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Alabama State Federation of Labor v. McAdorySupreme Court of Alabama · 1944
  2. Pressman v. State Tax CommissionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985
  3. Ball v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1961
  4. Newton v. City of TuscaloosaSupreme Court of Alabama · 1948
  5. Alabama Ed. Ass'n v. BD. OF TRUSTEES, ETC.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1979

14 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