Snow v. City of Memphis
Tennessee Supreme Court
527 S.W.2d 55 (1975)

- Written by Joe Cox, JD
Facts
Tennessee allowed constitutional amendment either by the convention process or by the legislature directly submitting a question to voters. In the November 1968 election, Tennessee’s legislature proposed calling a constitutional convention on five questions. Voters approved only one question of the five. That question required property to be separated into real property, intangible personal property, and tangible personal property, and further divided real property into public utility, residential, farm, and industrial/commercial classifications. The convention occurred in 1971 and acted to add a fifth classification to real property, providing that residential property containing two or more rental units would be classified as industrial/commercial property. A group of real property owners who were impacted by this classification, including Charlotte Snow (plaintiff), filed suit against the City of Memphis (the city) (defendant) and other governmental entities, seeking a ruling that the classification, by differing from the question called by voters, was unconstitutional in violation of both the state constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment of the federal Constitution. While Tennessee had had some experience with constitutional conventions, this particular issue was unique. However, a 1953 convention had imposed a limitation that allowed the legislature to propose actions to voters only within the limitation of the call. At issue in the case of the real property classification was how broadly to construe that limitation. The trial court ruled in favor of Snow that the amendment was outside the scope of the question called and was thus invalid. The city appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fones, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.