# City of Tuscaloosa v. Kamp

> Supreme Court of Alabama · October 27, 1995 · 670 So. 2d 31

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7695597

## Case

- **Full name:** CITY OF TUSCALOOSA v. John KAMP
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Alabama
- **Decided:** October 27, 1995
- **Citations:** 670 So. 2d 31; 1995 Ala. LEXIS 414; 1995 WL 631171
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Maddox
- **Judges:** Houston, Shores, Ingram, Cook, Maddox
- **Cited by:** 1 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7695597

## Opinion text

MADDOX, Justice
(concurring in the result).
I concur in the result only. I agree with the principle stated by the majority that a published annexation bill that does not provide for a referendum may be amended by the legislature to eliminate a portion of the territory as described in the notice and, thus, that such an amendment would not make the act violate § 106 of the Alabama Constitution. The result reached here is consistent with the views I expressed in City of Mobile v. Aborady, 600 So.2d 1009 (Ala.1992) (Maddox, J., dissenting), and Lowe v. Pension Bd. of the Gen. Retirement System for Employees of Jefferson County, 665 So.2d 195 (Ala.1995) (Maddox, J., dissenting).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7695597. Public record. Not legal advice.