Kirby v. . Commissioners of Person
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBeogdeN, J.
No question is raised with reference to the validity and regularity of all preliminary steps required by the statute in adopting bond ordinances or resolutions. The merits of the whole controversy depend upon the proper construction of section 17, chapter 81,- Public Laws of 1927, with reference to that part of said section which undertakes to fix a debt limit for the county. It is conceded that the proposed bond issue is for a necessary governmental expense, and hence special legislative authority for issuing bonds for such purpose is contained in section 8 of said County Finance Act. The…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Montgomery v. City of AtlantaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1926
- Neal v. Town of MarionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
- Dockery v. Town of HamletSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Board of Education v. Town of GreenvilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
- Henderson Land, Timber & Investment Co. v. Police JurySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1925
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Sessions v. . Columbus CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- Stephens Co. v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
- Virginia Trust Co. v. City of AshevilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
- Jones v. . Alamance CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
- Jones v. Alamance CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.