Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

STATE v. J. W. HUGHES.

PER CURIAM.

We have carefully considered the facts as set forth in the special verdict in this case. We think the ordinance valid under the authority of Express Co. v. Charlotte, 186 N.C. p. 668. S. v. Denson, 189 N.C. p. 173. 3 C. S., 2612 (a) (Public Laws 1921, ch. 2, sec. 29), is the law now in force under which the Express Co. case, supra, was decided and the ordinance in the present case adopted. The case of S. v. Jones, 191 N.C. p. 371, is not in conflict. See Thompson v. Lumberton, 182 N.C. p. 260.

The judgment of the court below is

Reversed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

STATE v. HUGHES
(Apr 1, 1927)