Paducah Auto. Trades Ass'n v. City of Paducah
| Decision Date | 26 March 1948 |
| Citation | 307 Ky. 524 |
| Parties | Paducah Automotive Trades Ass'n et al. v. City Of Paducah. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
1. Municipal Corporations; Statutes. — Constitutional and statutory requirements that statutes or ordinances embrace no more than one subject, which is to be expressed in the title, is not violated if the contents of statute or ordinance are germane to the accomplishment of the subject stated in the title, and title need not be a complete index of statute or ordinance if it is sufficiently broad to inform casual reader of subject and purposes covered in the legislation. KRS 84.100; Const. sec. 51.
2. Municipal Corporations. — The title of the occupational license ordinance of the City of Paducah is sufficiently broad to inform a casual reader of the subject and purposes of the ordinance, and ordinance is not invalid because of misleading nature of the title. KRS 84.100.
3. Municipal Corporations. — The occupational license ordinance of the City of Paducah simply levies taxes on basis of gross receipts, whether coming to the merchant or manufacturer at once in cash, or on a deferred basis of credit or deferred payment, and does not tax intangibles, so that failure of title of ordinance to indicate that intangibles are taxed, does not invalidate ordinance. KRS 84.100.
4. Municipal Corporations. — The City of Paducah occupational license ordinance fixing taxes on business of coal peddler or express, transfer and trucking business under general schedule of charges, but providing that their minimum tax shall be fixed at so much for each vehicle employed, does not tax vehicles as such, so as to render title defective as embracing the subject of taxing vehicles in addition to imposing license taxes. KRS 84.100 5. Municipal Corporations. — The title of Paducah occupational license ordinance is not defective as covering more than the one general subject of license taxes, or as not expressing a subject expressed in ordinance. KRS 84.100.
6. Newspapers. — Where official newspaper of second class city included in every copy of a regular daily issue a special tabloid section bearing name of newspaper at its head, and containing nothing but the ordinance involved and on first page of complete newspaper was a blocked out section headed "city occupational license ordinance is printed today" and three other sentences calling attention to the tabloid section, the publication and circulation met all requirements of statutory publication of ordinance in a "newspaper." KRS 61.290, 84.100, 89.540, 89.620.
7. Licenses. — Municipalities have no inherent right to enact an occupational license ordinance.
8. Licenses. — Under constitutional provision authorizing General Assembly to delegate powers to municipalities to impose and collect license fees on trades, occupations and professions, and statutes enacted pursuant thereto, cities of second class have been given plenary power to enact ordinances imposing taxes on trades, occupations and professions, provided the taxes are reasonable and based on proper classifications. KRS 84.190, 92.280; Const. sec. 181.
9. Licenses. — The City of Paducah as a second class city, was authorized under statutory enactments pursuant to constitution to enact an occupational license tax ordinance taxing the various lines of business, trades, occupations, professions, vocations and callings in the city. KRS 84.190, 92.280; Const. sec. 181.
10. Constitutional Law. — An ordinance of the City of Paducah imposing occupational license taxes on various businesses, trades, occupations, professions, vocations and callings in the city whereby tax is based on the volume of business done and percentage of rate of taxation remains the same regardless of volume on which amount of taxes is determined did not deny equal protection of law in violation of Fourteenth Amendment. U.S. C.A. Const. Amend. 14.
11. Licenses. — Ordinance of the City of Paducah imposing an occupational license tax on various lines of businesses, trades, occupations, professions and callings in the city is not invalid as discriminatory and as lacking equality and uniformity or on ground that the classifications are not justified.
12. Constitutional Law; Searches and Seizures. — Ordinance of the City of Paducah imposing an occupational license tax on various businesses, trades, occupations, professions and callings in the city and requiring the maintenance of records and permitting audits when necessary to determine if the ordinance has been complied with is not unconstitutional on its face as permitting unlawful searches and as denying due process of law. U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 14 13. Licenses. — Ordinance of the City of Paducah imposing an occupational license tax on various businesses, trades, occupations, professions and callings within the city and forbidding the refund of any portion of any license tax while objectionable as arbitrary with respect to the refund provision, is not invalid on that ground.
14. Municipal Corporations. — Since the Paducah occupational license ordinance has a severability clause, the invalidation of some sections would not invalidate the whole, unless the invalidated sections were so vital that without them the ordinance could no longer accomplish its purpose.
Appeal from McCracken Circuit Court.
Wheeler, Marshall & Shelbourne for plaintiffs.
Adrian H. Terrell for defendant.
Before Joe L. Price, Judge.
Denying motion.
On December 23, 1947, the City of Paducah, Ky., a city of the second class having the City Manager form of government, through its Board of Commissioners adopted the ordinance involved in this litigation, it becoming effective under its terms on January 1, 1948.
The ordinance, an occupational license ordinance, is a comprehensive one of 84 sections, including an extensive classification schedule, is intended to, and does, cover practically all occupations, including wholesalers, retailers, manufacturers and the various professions engaged in business for gain in the City of Paducah. No attempt will be made to set out the terms of the ordinance in any detail. It is sufficient to say that it classifies the various types of business and fixes the license taxes on the basis of the gross receipts from the business. The tax is graduated on the basis of volume of gross receipts of the trade or occupation involved. In general the ordinance follows the form which such ordinances have taken in cities which have adopted occupational license taxes for revenue or regulation purposes.
Plaintiffs are engaged in the automotive trade in one form or another and brought this suit as a class suit on behalf of themselves and all others affected by the proposed tax, against the city, to enjoin the enforcement of the ordinance and asked for a binding declaration of rights declaring the ordinance void and unenforcible. The court below denied the temporary injunction sought and the plaintiffs have filed a motion in this court asking that this court, or a judge thereof, direct the judge of the McCracken Circuit Court to issue a temporary injunction in accordance with the prayer of the petition.
Since the record appears to be complete and the questions involved can in all probability be disposed of on this motion for a temporary injunction, we have complied with the request of the parties by publishing an opinion giving the reasons for our decision. The whole court sat in the consideration of this case.
Grounds for Attack.
The petition sets out some eight grounds on which plaintiffs attack the validity of the ordinance in question. In their brief filed in this court, the attack falls into three main grounds:
1. That the title to the ordinance is defective.
2. That the ordinance was not properly advertised.
3. That the city was not authorized to levy such taxes.
There are also several minor grounds which will be treated together under another division.
We will consider these questions in the order in which they have been stated.
The Title.
The title of the ordinance reads as follows: "An ordinance fixing and regulating the license taxes, and manner and form of granting and issuing same on the various lines of business, trades, occupations, professions, vocations and callings in the City of Paducah, Kentucky, and providing penalties for non-payment thereof, and for violation thereof, and making it unlawful to engage in any such lines of business, trades, occupations, professions, vocations and callings without first paying the license tax and procuring licenses as provided herein; repealing all ordinances in conflict therewith, and providing a separability clause."
The statute to be complied with is KRS 84.100 and reads as follows: "No ordinance shall embrace more than one subject, and that shall be expressed in the title."
Plaintiffs take the position that the title is misleading does not show the nature of the exactions required by the ordinance and does not indicate the true purpose of the ordinance, which is to raise a large sum of money to be placed to the credit of the general revenue fund of the city. As we interpret this principal complaint, it is more clearly expressed by the contention that under the title, the ordinance purports to cover regulation of business, but the ordinance itself shows it is principally for revenue purposes. Three other minor complaints against the title, mentioned in the brief, are that the ordinance, which levies a gross receipts tax, also attempts to levy a tax on intangible property, a tax on manufacturing and a tax on vehicles, and there is no reference in the title to show that the latter three matters are covered by the ordinance.
In construing sec. 51 of the constitution in its relation to legislative acts, which is analogous to the section of the statute being construed in its relation to ordinances of cities of the second class, we have said that the particular manner in which the object of an...
To continue reading
Request your trial