Legal Opinion

Marshall v. Rose, Mayor

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided September 28, 1948No. 16133PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The order of Judge Sease follows:

The plaintiff in this action is a taxpayer of the City of Marion. Fie seeks to enjoin the corporate authorities of that City from issuing not exceeding Fifty Thousand ($50,000-.00) Dollars of General Obligation Bonds of the City, whose proceeds are to be used “for the erection of a recreation center and swimming pool within the city limits of Marion.” To a complaint which alleges the invalidity of such bonds upon the grounds,(a) That the purpose for which their proceeds are to be expended is neither a corporate purpose, Article VIII, Section 6, nor a public…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Briggs v. Greenville CountySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
  2. Luther v. WheelerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1905
  3. Gentry v. TaylorSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1939
  4. Winstead v. Williams, MayorSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1925

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Gion v. City of Santa CruzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  2. Hospitality Ass'n of South Carolina, Inc. v. County of CharlestonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1995
  3. Mims v. McNairSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1969
  4. Leonard v. TALBERTSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1954
  5. Sadler v. LyleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1970

1 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