Legal Opinion
Gotlieb v. City of Birmingham
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided January 14, 1943No. 6 Div. 72PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GARDNER, Chief Justice.
The City of Birmingham instituted this proceeding in equity for the enforcement of licenses claimed to be due the city by defendants (comprising a partnership doing business under the name of Star Provision Company) under Schedule 205, § T, License Code, 1940, and Schedule 203 of § 1 of the License Code 1941 of said city.
The remedy in equity, including injunctive relief, finds support in Tit. 37, Art. 4, Code of Alabama 1940, and is not here questioned.
The above-noted license provisions are identical in verbiage. The language here pertinent reads as follows: “Packing…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Wisconsin v. J. C. Penney Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Miller v. Standard Nut Margarine Co. of Fla.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- White v. City of DecaturSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
- City of Sedalia Ex Rel. Ferguson v. Shell Petroleum Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1936
- Dixie Coaches, Inc. v. RamsdenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Ex Parte Uniroyal Tire Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2000
- City of Los Angeles v. Belridge Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1954
- Al Means, Inc. v. City of MontgomerySupreme Court of Alabama · 1958
- Mobile Battle House, Inc. v. City of MobileSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955
- City of Phoenix v. Borden CompanyArizona Supreme Court · 1958
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.