Court Opinion

ID: 9727124
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 13:20:44.43165+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:33.785075
License: Public Domain

Edwards, J.
(dissenting). I concur in affirmance of the decree below.
The general rule pertaining to ordinances which deal with a subject also covered by a statute was stated thus by this Court in Builders Association v. City of Detroit, 295 Mich 272, 275:
“The fact that there is a State law on the same subject as that covered by a municipal ordinance relating to Sunday observance does not render the ordinance invalid, provided the city has authority, •either express or implied, to legislate in regard to *73the subject, and its legislation is not in conflict with the State enactment.”
As Mr. Justice Voeliieb points out, the penal provisions of the ordinance before us are in obvious and substantial conflict with the State statute pertaining to Sunday occupations. CL 1948, § 435.1 et seq. (Stat Ann 1957 Rev § 18.851 et seq.)