Plant Food Co. v. City of Charlotte
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtSeawell, J.
The defendant contends that the contract before us for consideration involves those discretionary powers of the municipal board which must be kept free at all times, to be exercised in the public interest; and since the powers concerned are of that' character, they cannot be delegated, suspended, or embarrassed by contract, which would have a binding force upon succeeding boards. The plaintiff contends that the contract involves only the proprietary or business powers of the municipal corporation, and that the service involved is a legitimate subject of contract which might extend over a…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- California Reduction Co. v. Sanitary Reduction WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- McBean v. City of FresnoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- City of Rochester v. . GutberlettNew York Court of Appeals · 1914
- Asbury v. Town of AlbemarleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Metz v. City of AshevilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Walton v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1996
- City of Big Spring v. Board of ControlTexas Supreme Court · 1966
- Maryland Classified Employees Ass'n v. AndersonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977
- Frank v. City of CodyWyoming Supreme Court · 1977
- McCombs v. City of AsheboroCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.