Legal Opinion

Sessions v. . Columbus County

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 4, 1939PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

It is conceded that as tbe amount of tbe proposed bonds is in excess of two-tbirds of tbe amount by wbicb tbe outstanding indebtedness of tbe county was reduced during tbe preceding fiscal year ending 30 June, 1938, tbe bonds in question may not be issued under Art. V, sec. 4, of tbe Constitution without a vote of tbe people and unless “approved by a majority of those who shall vote thereon.” Gill v. Charlotte, 213 N. C., 160, 195 S. E., 368. It is further conceded that in tbe circumstances this approval was necessary regardless of tbe purpose for wbicb tbe bonds were to be used, unless tbe…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Herring v. . DixonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
  2. Henderson v. . WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  3. Southern Railway Co. v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  4. Parvin v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  5. Armstrong v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Stephenson v. BartlettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2002
  2. Board of Managers of the James Walker Memorial Hospital v. City of WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  3. Jamison v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  4. Mason v. Moore County Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  5. Edwards v. Board of Education of Yancey CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952

15 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