M. H. Rhodes, Inc. v. City of Raleigh
| Citation | 9 S.E.2d 389,217 N.C. 627 |
| Decision Date | 08 June 1940 |
| Docket Number | 461. |
| Parties | M. H. RHODES, Inc., et al. v. CITY OF RALEIGH. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina |
This is an action brought by the plaintiffs to secure a declaratory judgment construing certain ordinances of the City of Raleigh relating to parking meters passing upon their validity, and declaring the relation of the parties thereto.
The plaintiffs complained that they had sold to the City of Raleigh a number of parking meters under certain ordinances relating to their establishment enacted by the City Council.
The parking meters are described as coin-slot devices permanently fixed at the street curb line in front of the space marked for the parking of motor vehicles. They are operated by the insertion of an appropriate coin according to the time during which the car is permitted to remain parked. Their operation the parking privilege thus secured, and the general purport of the ordinances and procedure thereunder may be better understood by the citation of pertinent parts of the ordinances.
These provide for the establishment of parking meter zones, wherein motor vehicles may be parked during certain periods of time on every day except Sunday, and provide for the installation of "parking meters" in spaces designated on the streets. They further provide:
The ordinances provide penalties for parking over-time and for other violations of their provisions, limit the consecutive depositing of coins, provide for loading zones, etc.
It is provided: "The five and one cent coins required to be deposited as provided in this Ordinance are hereby levied as police regulation, traffic control, and inspection fees to cover the cost of inspection and regulation involved in the inspection, installation, operation, control and use of the parking spaces, parking meters and traffic control described herein and involved in checking up and regulating traffic and the parking of vehicles in the parking meter zone created hereby."
"This Ordinance being a police and traffic regulation and in the interest of the public safety, shall take effect from and after the date of its passage."
The complaint states that the zone marked out for parking under this plan was under an ordinance prescribing the general one hour parking limit prior to the revision brought about by the cited ordinances.
Plaintiff Company and the City of Raleigh entered into the contracts for the sale and installation of parking meters distributed by plaintiffs, under which the meters and installation thereof should be paid for by the City. The contract was not to come into effect until the validity of the ordinances and the right of the City, under the Constitution of North Carolina and appropriate statutes, to install and operate the parking meters, should be passed upon by the Court.
The defendant agreed with the plaintiffs for the installation of other parking meters under the ordinances cited, or similar ordinances, and the defendant has refused to go further with the contract until the ordinances have been made the subject of a declaratory judgment of the court sustaining their validity.
Upon the hearing of the matter before Judge Harris, the power of the municipality to purchase, install, and operate parking meters, as described in the pleadings and in the ordinances was sustained, and the ordinances held to be valid. From the judgment, the defendant appealed.
Bunn & Arendell, of Raleigh, for defendant-appellant.
Royall, Gosney & Smith, of Raleigh, for plaintiffs-appellees.
The appellant contends that the defendant City had no constitutional or statutory authority to enact an ordinance imposing a charge for parking in the streets. The appellees contend that the City does have such power under the following statutes C.S. § 2787(11), authorizing municipalities to "adopt such ordinances for the regulation and use of the streets *** as it may deem best for the public welfare of the citizens of the city"; C.S. § 2787(31), authorizes municipalities "to provide for the regulation, diversion, and limitation of *** vehicular traffic upon public streets [and] highways" for public safety; C.S. § 2793, relating to streets, giving the municipality authority to "regulate and control the use thereof by *** vehicles"; C.S. § 2789, declaring that the particular powers given by the Act shall not be deemed exclusive, but that the City shall have and exercise all other powers which are now or may be hereafter granted to cities under the laws of the State; C.S.§ 2787 (29) authorizing the municipality "to provide for all inspections which may be expedient, proper, or necessary for the welfare, safety, and health of the city and its citizens, and regulate the fees for such inspection;" C.S.§ 2787 (7) authorizing the...
To continue reading
Request your trial