Code of Alabama

Ala. Code § 11-45-1 (2026)

Adoption and Enforcement Authorized.

✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaAla. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Municipal corporations may from time to time adopt ordinances and resolutions not inconsistent with the laws of the state to carry into effect or discharge the powers and duties conferred by the applicable provisions of this title and any other applicable provisions of law and to provide for the safety, preserve the health, promote the prosperity, and improve the morals, order, comfort, and convenience of the inhabitants of the municipality, and may enforce obedience to such ordinances.

(Code 1907, §1251; Code 1923, §1992; Code 1940, T. 37, §455; Acts 1971, No. 2279, p. 3670, §1.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases, 1979–2019 · leading case: State Dept. of Revenue v. Reynolds Metals Co., 541 So. 2d 524 (Ala. 1988).
State Dept. of Revenue v. Reynolds Metals Co., 541 So. 2d 524 (Ala. 1988). · cites it 6× “The Legislature prescribed municipalities' powers and duties by the enactment of what is now Code 1975, § 11-45-1: "Municipal corporations may from time to time adopt ordinances and resolutions not inconsistent with the laws of the state to carry into effect or discharge the…”
Storer Cable Commc'ns v. City of Montgomery, 806 F. Supp. 1518 (M.D. Ala. 1992). · cites it 5× “The residual police power of Alabama’s municipalities is governed by Alabama Code 1975 § 11-45-1: “Municipal corporations may from time to time adopt ordinances and resolutions not inconsistent with the law of the state .”
MADALONI v. City of Mobile, 37 So. 3d 739 (Ala. 2009). · cites it 4× “See also § 11-45-1, Ala.Code 1975. [8] This argument fails because, as discussed above, Act No.”
BellSouth Telecomm., Inc. v. City of Mobile, 171 F. Supp. 2d 1261 (S.D. Ala. 2001). · cites it 4× “Ala.Code § 11-45-1. Mobile’s Ordinance is a valid exercise of the City’s police powers, and BellSouth has not demonstrated that the Ordinance is inconsistent in with the laws of the state.”
Gibson v. City of Alexander City, 779 So. 2d 1153 (Ala. 2000). · cites it 6× “"` It is within the authority of the Attalla City Council under § 11-45-1 to regulate hours of sale beyond those hours effected by the Board's regulation where there is no conflict and the municipal ordinance sets hours that are reasonable.”
KTK Mining of Virginia, LLC v. City of Selma, 984 F. Supp. 2d 1209 (S.D. Ala. 2013). · cites it 7× “Ala.Code § 11-45-1. Moreover, “Although municipalities exercise ‘such power .”
Smith v. City of Huntsville, 515 So. 2d 72 (Ala. Crim. App. 1986). · cites it 5× “IV, § 89 (1901); Ala.Code § 11-45-1 (1975). “Whether an ordinance is inconsistent with the general law of the State is to be determined by whether the municipal law prohibits anything which the State law specifically permits.”
Town of Eclectic v. Mays, 547 So. 2d 96 (Ala. 1989). · cites it 2× “The court stated that under Ala.Code 1975, § 11-45-1, Eclectic's ordinance was valid to the extent that it provided that individuals who refused to use the service could be sentenced to jail for as long as 6 months or fined up to $500 or both.”
Benson W. Peak v. City of Tuscaloosa., 73 So. 3d 5 (Ala. Crim. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “Article IV, § 89, Alabama Constitution of 1901, provides that “[t]he legislature shall not have power to authorize any municipal corporation to pass any laws inconsistent with the general laws of this state.”
Gadsden Motel Co. v. City of Attalla, 378 So. 2d 705 (Ala. 1979). · cites it 3× “And, under the provision of § 11-45-1, Code of Alabama, 1975, 1 the City has the authority to regulate the hours of sale of alcoholic beverages, as long as the hours of sale are reasonable.”
St. Clair Cnty. Home Builders Ass'n v. City of Pell City, 61 So. 3d 992 (Ala. 2010). “” § 11-45-1, Ala.Code 1975. “All cities and towns in this state shall have the power to maintain the health and cleanliness of the city or town within its limits and within the police jurisdiction thereof.”
Scott v. Coachman, 73 So. 3d 607 (Ala. 2011). · cites it 6× “Additionally, this Court has acknowledged that municipal ordinances are “law,” stating: “[W]e find further, that Alabama case law, consistent with this statutory mandate [§ 11-45-1, Ala.Code 1975], permits the enactment of laws by ordinance or resolution in the absence of a…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.