Drainage Commissioners v. Webb
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by plaintiffs from Ferguson, J., at May Term, 1912, of JDupliN. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the Court by Mr. Chief Justice Ciarle.
1Opinion of the Court
The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the Court by MR. CHIEF JUSTICE CLARK. The only question presented is whether the Legislature had the power by chapter 177, Public Laws 1911, to exempt from taxation bonds issued by the commissioners of the Muddy Creek Drainage District in Duplin County.(595) Constitution, Art. V, sec. 3, declares: "Laws shall be passed, taxing by a uniform rule all moneys, credits, investments in bonds, stocks, joint-stock companies, or otherwise; and also all real and personal property." And Article VII, sec. 9, provides: "All taxes levied by any county,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Sanderlin v. LukenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Wilmington & Weldon Railroad v. AlsbrookSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
- Pullen v. . Corporation CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Shuford v. Commissioners of Lincoln CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
3Cited by24 opinions
- Carolina-Virginia Coastal Highway v. Coastal Turnpike AuthoritySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- State Ex Rel. Attorney-General v. KnightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- Van Dyke v. Tax CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
- Southern Railway Co. v. Cherokee CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- Sir Walter Lodge, No. 411 v. SwainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.