Legal Opinion
State v. Kimbrough
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided June 30, 1941No. 8 Div. 155PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
BOULDIN, Justice.
The legislative act in question, now appearing as Tit. 36, § 104 et seq., Code of 1940, is challenged as violative of the commerce clause of the Constitution of the United States, article 1, § 8, cl. 3.
In brief, the act requires all persons, including local dealers, who bring used cars into Alabama for sale, to do three things before offering same for sale:
1. Register each car using a form provided by the Judge of Probate. The contents of this form are not specified, but left to the Judge of Probate of each county.
2. File with the Judge of Probate a bond, with surety,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bender v. ConnorDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1939
- Park McLain, Inc. v. HoeyDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1937
- State Ex Rel. Leathers v. ColemanSupreme Court of Florida · 1936
- State v. ErnstSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
- Motor Trading Co. v. IngelsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
3Cited by1 opinion
- Tri-State Auto Auction, Inc. v. OstrootSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1956