This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2013-06-25 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| The ordinance was upheld as a valid classification for the reason that, while there may be non-vehicle-drawing animals that also traverse the city roads, "but their number must be negligible and their appearance therein merely occasional, compared to the rig-drawing ones, as not to constitute a menace to the health of the community."[77] The mere fact that the legislative classification may result in actual inequality is not violative of the right to equal protection, for every classification of persons or things for regulation by law produces inequality in some degree, but the law is not thereby rendered invalid.[78] | |||||