Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bizzell Ex Rel. Bizzell v. Board of Aldermen

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 20, 1926Published

1Dissent

Stacy, Q. J.,

dissenting: Tbe ordinances in question are assailed upon tbe ground tbat they provide no standard or uniform rule whereby tbe discretion vested in tbe board of aldermen, to issue or to withhold permits for tbe erection and operation of gasoline filling or gasoline storage stations in tbe city of Goldsboro, may be exercised according to some fixed regulation, known and established, and applicable to all alike. Tbe attack was upheld by tbe trial court, and tbis is affirmed, for tbe reason stated, principally on authority of S. v. Tenant, 110 N. C., 609.

It is established by tbe…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Yick Wo v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. Jacobson v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
  3. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. Illinois ex rel. Drainage CommissionersSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
  4. Gundling v. ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
  5. New York Ex Rel. Lieberman v. Van De CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1905

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