4,834
edits
Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 56: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 56 (view source)
Revision as of 17:19, September 26, 2023
, September 26, 2023no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| (11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
* ''Lower Colorado River Authority v. McCraw'', 83 S.W.2d 629, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/083_SW2_629.pdf#page=8 636] (Tex. 1935) ("In the first place, it is settled that a statute is not local or special, within the meaning of this constitutional provision, even though its enforcement is confined to a restricted area, if persons or things throughout the state are affected thereby, or if it operates upon a subject that the people at large are interested in. Stephensen v. Wood, 119 Tex. 564, 34 S.W.2d 246. An examination of this act convinces us that it operates upon a subject that the state at large is interested in. In fact, the business and operation of this district is not restricted to a particular area.") | * ''Lower Colorado River Authority v. McCraw'', 83 S.W.2d 629, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/083_SW2_629.pdf#page=8 636] (Tex. 1935) ("In the first place, it is settled that a statute is not local or special, within the meaning of this constitutional provision, even though its enforcement is confined to a restricted area, if persons or things throughout the state are affected thereby, or if it operates upon a subject that the people at large are interested in. Stephensen v. Wood, 119 Tex. 564, 34 S.W.2d 246. An examination of this act convinces us that it operates upon a subject that the state at large is interested in. In fact, the business and operation of this district is not restricted to a particular area.") | ||
* ''Fritter v. West'', 65 S.W.2d 414, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/065_SW_414.pdf#page=2 415] (Tex.Civ.App.–San Antonio 1933, ref'd) ("Furthermore, by the expressed terms of this bill it affects only Kinney county. . . . In City of Fort Worth v. Bobbitt, 36 S.W.(2d) 479, 472, the court said: 'An act which designates a particular city or county by name * * * and whose operation is limited to such city or county, is held to be local or special.' In Austin Bros. v. Patton (Tex. Com. App.) 288 S. W. 182, 186, the court said: 'A local law is one the operation of which is confined to a fixed part of the territory of the state. The statute under consideration relates to Houston county only–a particular one of the class, all counties being the class.'") | |||
* ''Smith v. State'', 49 S.W.2d 739, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/049_SW2_739.pdf#page=5 743-44] (Tex.Crim.App. 1932) ("Again, the effort of the Legislature, by amending [the relevant statute], after the census of 1930 disclosed that McLennan county had by virtue of increased population passed beyond its operation, to hold McLennan county within the purview of the act, manifests, under the decisions, a purpose, by a pretended classification, to evade the constitutional inhibition, and, under the guise of such classification, to enact a law designed for McLennan county alone. . . . Hence the opinion is expressed that a violation of the provisions of article 3, § 56, of the Constitution is manifested.") | * ''Smith v. State'', 49 S.W.2d 739, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/049_SW2_739.pdf#page=5 743-44] (Tex.Crim.App. 1932) ("Again, the effort of the Legislature, by amending [the relevant statute], after the census of 1930 disclosed that McLennan county had by virtue of increased population passed beyond its operation, to hold McLennan county within the purview of the act, manifests, under the decisions, a purpose, by a pretended classification, to evade the constitutional inhibition, and, under the guise of such classification, to enact a law designed for McLennan county alone. . . . Hence the opinion is expressed that a violation of the provisions of article 3, § 56, of the Constitution is manifested.") | ||
| Line 86: | Line 88: | ||
* ''Smith v. State'', 113 S.W. 289, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/113_SW_289.pdf#page=12 300] (Tex.Crim.App. 1908) (P.J. Davidson, dissenting) ("I am persuaded that no case can be found in the reports which holds a law to be general which failed to provide for and anticipate the wants of the future. On the contrary, whenever the question has arisen, every court has held a law special which created a classification which was arbitrary or illusive, and which operated upon unchangeable conditions and failed to provide for future localities or objects to come within the class, no matter how ingenious the evasion employed to make a special law assume the guise of a general law may have been.") | * ''Smith v. State'', 113 S.W. 289, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/113_SW_289.pdf#page=12 300] (Tex.Crim.App. 1908) (P.J. Davidson, dissenting) ("I am persuaded that no case can be found in the reports which holds a law to be general which failed to provide for and anticipate the wants of the future. On the contrary, whenever the question has arisen, every court has held a law special which created a classification which was arbitrary or illusive, and which operated upon unchangeable conditions and failed to provide for future localities or objects to come within the class, no matter how ingenious the evasion employed to make a special law assume the guise of a general law may have been.") | ||
* ''Reed v. Rogan'', 59 S.W. 255, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/059_SW_255.pdf#page=3 257-58] (Tex. 1900) ("It has been well said that 'a law is not local that operates upon a subject in which the people at large are interested.' Healey v. Dudley, 5 Lans. 115. The sales of the school lands of the State may be a matter of especial [sic] importance to the people who reside in the localities where they are situate. They are none the less a matter of interest to the people in general and to the State itself. Not only is the school fund . . . . The simple solution of the question is that the people of the State–its public–are interested in the property of the State, and that a law which provides for its sale is a general and public law.") | |||
* ''Clark v. Finley'', 54 S.W. 343, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/054_SW_343.pdf#page=3 345] (Tex. 1899) ("Indeed, it is perhaps the exception when a statute is found which applies to every person or thing alike. . . . The tendency of the recent decisions upon the subject, as it seems to us, is to drift into refinements that are rather more specious than profitable. It is said in some of the cases that the classification must be reasonable; in others, that it must not be unreasonable or arbitrary, etc. If it is meant by this that the legislature cannot evade the prohibition of the constitution as to special laws by making a law applicable to a pretended class, which is, in fact, no class, we concur in the proposition.") | * ''Clark v. Finley'', 54 S.W. 343, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/054_SW_343.pdf#page=3 345] (Tex. 1899) ("Indeed, it is perhaps the exception when a statute is found which applies to every person or thing alike. . . . The tendency of the recent decisions upon the subject, as it seems to us, is to drift into refinements that are rather more specious than profitable. It is said in some of the cases that the classification must be reasonable; in others, that it must not be unreasonable or arbitrary, etc. If it is meant by this that the legislature cannot evade the prohibition of the constitution as to special laws by making a law applicable to a pretended class, which is, in fact, no class, we concur in the proposition.") | ||
| Line 91: | Line 95: | ||
* ''City of Dallas v. Western Electric Co.'', 18 S.W. 552, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/018_SW_552.pdf#page=2 553] (Tex. 1892) ("The prohibitions, limitations, and requirements contained in section 56 of article 3 . . . . If provisions found in the charters of cities containing over 10,000 inhabitants are subject to no other objection than that they are local or special, and such as could be provided for by a general law, they must stand because they are permitted by section 5 of article 11, and therefore expressly excepted from the operation of section 56 of article 3. If the privileges and powers contained in such charters are such as can be given to cities by either general or special legislation, they must be respected.") | * ''City of Dallas v. Western Electric Co.'', 18 S.W. 552, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/018_SW_552.pdf#page=2 553] (Tex. 1892) ("The prohibitions, limitations, and requirements contained in section 56 of article 3 . . . . If provisions found in the charters of cities containing over 10,000 inhabitants are subject to no other objection than that they are local or special, and such as could be provided for by a general law, they must stand because they are permitted by section 5 of article 11, and therefore expressly excepted from the operation of section 56 of article 3. If the privileges and powers contained in such charters are such as can be given to cities by either general or special legislation, they must be respected.") | ||
* ''Dillingham v. Putnam'', 14 S.W. 303, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/014_SW_303.pdf#page=2 304] (Tex. 1890) (citation omitted) ("The section of the Constitution forbidding the passage of special or local laws on numerated subjects forbids the passage of such laws 'for limitation of civil or criminal actions' | * ''Dillingham v. Putnam'', 14 S.W. 303, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/014_SW_303.pdf#page=2 304] (Tex. 1890) (citation omitted) ("The section of the Constitution forbidding the passage of special or local laws on numerated subjects forbids the passage of such laws 'for limitation of civil or criminal actions' but we do not understand the Act in question within the meaning of the Constitution to be such a limitation. We understand that section of the Constitution to forbid the passage of a law which would extend or restrict the time within which an action should be brought against or in favor of one person, when upon a like cause of action a longer or shorter period of limitation is provided for persons generally of like status.") | ||
* ''Lytle v. Halff'', 12 S.W. 610, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/012_SW_610.pdf#page=5 614] (Tex. 1889) ("Every law fixing the territory which shall constitute a judicial district is necessarily local in its character, but the power of the legislature to do this is expressly recognized. The creation of two judicial districts in a county operates no further towards the regulation of the affairs of the county than does the establishment of one, and it seems to us that the act in question is not within the meaning of the constitution on regulating the affairs of a county; for that paragraph of the section referred to has application to such affairs as are common to all the subdivisions of the state referred to in it.") | * ''Lytle v. Halff'', 12 S.W. 610, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/012_SW_610.pdf#page=5 614] (Tex. 1889) ("Every law fixing the territory which shall constitute a judicial district is necessarily local in its character, but the power of the legislature to do this is expressly recognized. The creation of two judicial districts in a county operates no further towards the regulation of the affairs of the county than does the establishment of one, and it seems to us that the act in question is not within the meaning of the constitution on regulating the affairs of a county; for that paragraph of the section referred to has application to such affairs as are common to all the subdivisions of the state referred to in it.") | ||