Davis v. City of Waycross
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Hnx, O. J.
Attacks upon the constitutionality of a statute because “the title to the act contains two distinct and separate subject-matters,” and because “the body of the act contains matter variant from what is expressed in the title thereof,” without more explicit specification, are too' general, vague, and indefinite to raise any question for certification to the Supreme Court. The “two distinct and separate subject-matters,” and the matter in the body of the act, “variant from what is expressed in the title,” should be specifically pointed out. Parker-Hensel Engineering Co. v. Schuler, 7 Ga. App. 396 (66. S. E. 1038), and citations. Judgment affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.