Opinion

State Ex Rel. Amick v. Lancaster

  • 228 N.C. 157
  • 44 S.E.2d 733
  • 1947 N.C. LEXIS 568
Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Filed
Nov 5, 1947
Status
Published
Author
Stacy
On the bench
Stacy
Cited by
8 cases
Authority
More cited than 82.0%

The opinion

Stacy, C. J.

It is not stated whether tbe action was dismissed on procedural or constitutional grounds. Hence, we do not reach tbe constitutional question, if tbe remedy be defective or inappropriate. “Tbe

*158

courts will not determine a constitutional question, even when properly presented, if there be also present some other ground upon which the case may be made to turn.”

S. v. Lueders,

214 N. C., 558 , 200 S. E., 22 .

It would be strange indeed, if the same government which authorizes the establishment of a “liquor control store,” should also provide for its padlocking at the instance of a private citizen and thus render all who are connected with its maintenance “guilty of a nuisance.” Gr. S., 19-1. It was never intended that the procedure here 'invoked to abate a nuisance, Gr. S., 19-2, should be applied against an alcoholic control board set up under color of legislative authority, or against one who rents a building to such a board for the purpose of operating a liquor control store. The remedy selected seems inappropriate.

There was no error in dismissing the action.

Affirmed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.