Court Opinion

ID: 9858048
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 16:12:59.674593+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:01:29.979107
License: Public Domain

On Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing.
A possible distinction between the ordinance under consideration in Lammon v. City of San Antonio, Tex.Civ.App., 223 S.W.2d 533 and the ordinance here is that so far as we are able to tell from the opinion in the Lammon case the ordinance there prohibited solicitation only, whereas the ordinance involved in this case provides “No person shall solicit or accept orders for subscriptions for any book, magazine or periodical on the streets * * * ” (emphasis ours) within the prohibited area. If the ordinance here involved be construed to prohibit the acceptance of an unsolicited order, it .might have no reasonable relation to control of traffic congestion. We think, however, it must be reasonably construed in view of the evil sought to be abated, and that when so construed, it does not prohibit the mere acceptance of an order in the absence of'solicitation therefor.
The motion is overruled.