Legal Opinion

Town of Hodgenville v. Gainesboro Tel. Co., Inc.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)

Decided January 13, 1931PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion of the Court by

Chief Justice Logan

Affirming.

On June 1, 1925, the town of Hodgenville, by ordinance, granted a franchise to the G-ainesboro Telephone Company which authorized it to maintain and operate a system of telephones in the town. Pursuant to the authority thus granted, the telephone company innstalled a system of telephones in the town, and has since been engaged in the business of operating telephones therein.

_ Later the city council of Hodgenville enacted an ordinance providing for an occupation tax which should be imposed upon persons, firms, and corporations engaged in…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. City of Princeton v. Princeton Electric Light & Power Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1915
  2. Gathright v. H. M. Byllesby & Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1913
  3. Louisville Home Telephone Co. v. City of LouisvilleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1908
  4. Cum. Telep. & Teleg. Co. v. HopkinsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1906
  5. Bates v. City of MonticelloCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1917

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. City of Bowling Green v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1950
  2. Union Light, Heat & Power Co. v. City of CovingtonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932
  3. City of Ashland v. FanninCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1937
  4. Ralston v. City of MiddlesboroCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1952

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API