Ex parte Siebenhauer
Nevada Supreme Court
Habeas Corpus. The facts appear in the opinion. I. The charter of a municipal corporation must be strictly construed. (Sedgwick on Stat. Const. 281-83.) If there be any doubt the doubt must be resolved in favor of the petitioner. (1 Dillon on Munic. Corp. sec. 55 and n.) The mode and manner of taxation must be strictly followed. (1 Dillon on Munic. Corp. sec. 620.) II. Persons in the petitioner’s business are never known as, or called, solicitors.
Read the full summary
Habeas Corpus. The facts appear in the opinion. I. The charter of a municipal corporation must be strictly construed. (Sedgwick on Stat. Const. 281-83.) If there be any doubt the doubt must be resolved in favor of the petitioner. (1 Dillon on Munic. Corp. sec. 55 and n.) The mode and manner of taxation must be strictly followed. (1 Dillon on Munic. Corp. sec. 620.) II. Persons in the petitioner’s business are never known as, or called, solicitors. The court can not conclude that such persons were intended by the legislature. III. The state or county under a state law collects the same kind of…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Hawley, J.:
1. Petitioner is a citizen of the state of California. He came from San Francisco for the purpose of soliciting orders from the merchants of Virginia City, and did obtain orders for merchandise, which orders were to be filled in San Francisco by petitioner and shipped to said merchants in Virginia City. He testifies that he and others, who are engaged in this occupation or business, are known among merchants as commercial or traveling agents, and are not *367called solicitors. He was arrested upon a complaint charging him with soliciting such orders without taking out and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Camp v. RogersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1877
- Thorpe v. SchoolingNevada Supreme Court · 1871
- Weil v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
- Southport v. OgdenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1854
- Ex parte RobinsonNevada Supreme Court · 1877
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Petersen v. BruenNevada Supreme Court · 1990
- Welfare Division of the Nevada State Department of Health v. Washoe County Welfare DepartmentNevada Supreme Court · 1972
- Gruber v. BakerNevada Supreme Court · 1890
- Escalle v. MarkNevada Supreme Court · 1919
- State ex rel. Copeland v. WoodburyNevada Supreme Court · 1883
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.