State v. Morgan
Citations
- 2 S.D. 32
- 48 N.W. 314
- 1891 S.D. LEXIS 4
Syllabus
<p>1. When a party assails the constitutionality of an act, he must show be- . yond reasonable doubt that it is in violation of the fundamental law of our government. Every presumption is in favor of the validity of a legislative enactment, and it is for the attacking party to show that his rights are invaded by that act, and that it does not come within the legitimate exercise of the lawmaking power, under the constitution.</p> <p>2. The object of Section 21 of Article 3 of the constitution of the state, which provides that “no law shall embrace more than one subject, which shall be expressed in its title,’- was to prevent the bringing together in one act subjects having no necessary connection or relation with each other, and to gmard the legislatures and communities affected by the law against surprise and imposition; and it is mandatory, — a direct, positive, and imperative limitation upon the legislature.</p> <p>3. This action of the constitution was not intended to embarrass the legislature in the legitimate exercise of its powers by compelling a needless multiplication of bills designed to meet the same object. A liberal interpretation and construction should be given it by the courts so as not to cripple or limit legislative enactments any further than is necessary for the requirements of the law. The g'round that an act embraces more than one subject, and that it was not sufficiently expressed in its title, should be grave, and olie conflict between the statute and constitution plain and manifest, before courts will be justified in declaring it unconstitutional and void.</p> <p>4. When the title of a legislative act expresses a general subject or purpose which is single, all matters which are naturally and reasonably included in it, and all measures which will or may facilitate the accomplishment of the purpose, are germane to its title. The title must express the subject comprehensively enough to include all the provisions in the body of the act. It need n
Judges: Bennett
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
37 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Simpson v. TobinSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1985-05-01· cited 102×
- State v. BeckerSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1892-04-05· cited 86×
- Gregory v. ShurtleffUtah Supreme Court· 2013-03-19· cited 60×
- McMacken v. StateSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1982-06-28· cited 46×
- Independent Community Bankers Ass'n of South Dakota v. State Ex Rel. MeierhenrySouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1984-03-28· cited 44×
- Morrow v. WipfSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1908-04-23· cited 40×
- State Ex Rel. Oster v. JorgensonSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1965-09-15· cited 35×
- Wheelon v. South Dakota Land Settlement BoardSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1921-01-28· cited 31×
- South Dakota Ass'n of Tobacco & Candy Distributors v. State Ex Rel. Department of RevenueSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1979-06-21· cited 27×
- Kanaly v. State by and Through JanklowSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1985-05-29· cited 27×
- State ex rel. Kol v. North Dakota Children's Home SocietyNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1901-12-19· cited 24×
- Accounts Management, Inc. v. WilliamsSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1992-04-15· cited 22×
- State v. MattesonSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1973-03-21· cited 21×
- State v. KirbySouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1914-07-13· cited 20×
- State v. StrongSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1976-09-03· cited 17×
- State Ex Rel. Dunker v. Spink Hutterian BrethrenSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1958-05-24· cited 16×
- Martineau v. CrabbeUtah Supreme Court· 1915-06-29· cited 16×
- Meierhenry v. City of HuronSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1984-06-20· cited 15×
- Pierson v. Minnehaha CountySouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1912-01-17· cited 15×
- State v. ShearerSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1972-10-06· cited 14×
Cites
24 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Gibbons v. OgdenSupreme Court· 1824-03-18· cited 2,543×
- Brown v. MarylandSupreme Court· 1827-03-12· cited 822×
- Robbins v. Shelby County Taxing DistrictSupreme Court· 1887-03-07· cited 570×
- Montclair v. RamsdellSupreme Court· 1883-03-18· cited 485×
- People ex rel. Drake v. MahaneyMichigan Supreme Court· 1865-10-28· cited 427×
- Leloup v. Port of MobileSupreme Court· 1888-05-14· cited 283×
- Asher v. TexasSupreme Court· 1888-10-29· cited 134×
- Davis v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1854-12-15· cited 111×
- Cannon v. HemphillTexas Supreme Court· 1851-07-01· cited 90×
- Dolese v. PierceIllinois Supreme Court· 1888-03-15· cited 51×
- Board of Supervisors v. HeenanSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1858-12-15· cited 38×
- Pennington v. WoolfolkCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 1880-04-20· cited 30×
- People ex rel. Thomas v. GoddardSupreme Court of Colorado· 1885-12-15· cited 24×
- State v. BrassfieldSupreme Court of Missouri· 1883-10-15· cited 23×
- Durkee v. City of JanesvilleWisconsin Supreme Court· 1870-06-15· cited 20×
- Wishmier v. State ex rel. DickeyIndiana Supreme Court· 1884-09-20· cited 18×
- People ex rel. Kellogg v. FlemingSupreme Court of Colorado· 1883-12-15· cited 17×
- State v. SilverNevada Supreme Court· 1874-04-15· cited 17×
- Fletcher v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 1876-11-15· cited 17×
- Brown v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia· 1884-03-04· cited 16×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.