Legal Opinion

Twining v. City of Wilmington

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 4, 1939PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSeawell, J.

1. We approve of tbe findings of Judge Cranmer tbat none of tbe projects mentioned was a necessary purpose.

2. If tbe provisions of Article VII, section 7, of tbe Constitution still apply, tbe issue of tbe bonds. is without authority, since none of tbe proposals were approved by a majority of tbe qualified voters at tbe election. Tbat may be true, also, by application of tbe statute, under which tbe proceeding leading to tbe bond issue was bad.

Article VII, section 7, of tbe Constitution is as follows: “7. No debt or loan except by a majority of voters. — No county, city, town, or other…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hemric v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Madison Cablevision, Inc. v. City of MorgantonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  2. Jamison v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  3. Maready v. City of Winston-SalemSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1996
  4. Purser v. LedbetterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  5. Mason v. Moore County Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948

6 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