Court Opinion

ID: 9727125
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 13:20:44.434945+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:33.859149
License: Public Domain

Smith, J.
(concurring). The only issue presented to us by either party, as taken from the “statement of question involved,” is this: “Was the trial court correct in holding the ordinance void because of arbitrary and discriminatory classification?” Such, also, was the issue upon which the case was tried below. The trial court noted that:
“The power of the city to enact a general Sunday closing ordinance is not in question in this suit, neither is the power to restrict Sunday closing to certain businesses and occupations if the distinction between those included and those excluded hears any rational relation to the purpose of the act.”
Certain of my brethren, however, have addressed themselves to the validity of the ordinance when measured against the existing State statute on the-same topic. This point, which is indeed important and may well be controlling, is not before us. If decision upon this question of public importance affecting the conduct of all businesses in the State is to turn in whole or in part upon such point, the litigants should be called upon to rehrief, reargue, and resubmit the case. Such not having been ordered, and the case reaching us solely upon the classification issue, I concur with Mr. Justice Kavanagh’s conclusions with respect thereto.