Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Pope

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 27, 1940No. 27848Published

1DissentBlake, C. J.

(dissenting) — Until the legislature gives specific authority to officers to break into a dwelling fiouse to execute a writ of replevin, I cannot acquiesce in a decision which sustains their right to do so. And, in view of the distinction always maintained in English and American jurisprudence between the dwelling house and other buildings, I think the court is not warranted in holding that the legislature of 1854, in enacting Rem. Rev. Stat., § 714 [P. C. § 8428], ever contemplated that the term “building” would ever be construed to mean dwelling house.

Our statutes defining first and second…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Foley v. MartinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Snydacker v. BrosseIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
  3. Hillman v. EdwardsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1902
  4. State v. . ArmfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1822
  5. State v. . WhitakerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API