Ex parte State
Ex parte State
Opinion of the Court
In this case the Court of Appeals held that the defendant was in properly convicted of a violation of subdivision 58 of section 2361 of the Code, which provides that “each person, firm, or corporation Avho engages in the business of selling or delivering lightning rods” shall pay a license charge of $25 annually “for each county in which they may sell or deliver said articles.” The conclusion was that defendant’s. acts were interstate commerce, and that there Avas nothing in said subdivision indicating that it was a part of the legislative purpose to require “such payment to be made by a person, firm, or corporation AAdiose acts, in selling or delivering lightning rods, are interstate' commerce transactions.”
We find nothing in the agreed statement of the facts of this case AAdiich brings it Avithin the operation of Oil Company v. Crain, 209 U. S. 212, 28 Sup. Ct. 475, 52
The writ of certiorari is denied.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.