recognizing that, “[w]here express terms of repeal are not used, the presumption is always against an intention to repeal an earlier statute, unless there is such inconsistency or repugnancy between the statutes as to preclude the presumption, or the later statute revises the whole subject-matter of the former”
How later courts described this case
- recognizing that, “[w]here express terms of repeal are not used, the presumption is always against an intention to repeal an earlier statute, unless there is such inconsistency or repugnancy between the statutes as to preclude the presumption, or the later statute revises the whole subject-matter of the former”
- providing that a municipal entity has both express and implied powers
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
On Petition for Rehearing
April 9,1937.
Per Curiam:
Rehearing denied.