Legal Opinion
Chichester v. Kroman
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided March 27, 1930No. 6 Div. 496PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.
The principles of law which seem to control this ease have been expressed in several of our decisions. We wish to group them for convenience. Unless specially authorized by the Legislature, a city cannot permit the obstruction of a street or alley which has been completely dedicated to the public. State v. L. & N. R. R. Co., 158 Ala. 208, 48 So. 391; City of Troy v. Watkins, 201 Ala. 274, 78 So. 50.
But the Legislature may vacate a street, and may delegate the power to do so to the municipal authorities. State v. L. & N. R. R. Co., supra; Mobile & M. Rwy. Co. v. A. M. Rwy. Co., 116 Ala. 66, 23…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Transportation Co. v. ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- City of Demopolis v. WebbSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
- Meighan v. Birmingham Terminal Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1910
- Albes v. Southern Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1909
- Highland Realty Co. v. Avondale Land Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1911
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Branyon v. KirkSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
- Blount County v. CampbellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1959
- Thomas v. JultakWyoming Supreme Court · 1951
- Burrow v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1949
- Snead v. TatumSupreme Court of Alabama · 1946
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.