Hamby v. Samson
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the judgment and order of Hon. W. B. Quarton, Judge, Kossuth County. This is a habeas corpus proceeding, in which plaintiff alleged that he was unlawfully restrained of his liberty by the defendant, who is sheriff of Kossuth county, under a warrant of commitment issued by a justice of the peace of said county on an information charging the plaintiff with the crime of larceny of a dog. The district judge discharged the petitioner, and defendant appeals.—
1Opinion of the CourtDeemer, C. J.
— The sole question presented by this appeal is whether or not a dog is the subject of larceny. That it was not at common law is conceded. The reasons for this were twofold: First, because it had no intrinsic value; and, second, because it was not fully domesticated, — but by nature base. The courts held that dogs, although reclaimed, could not be used for food, but were kept for the mere whim or pleasure of their owners, and therefore had no intrinsic value. A great deal of research and eloquence has been wasted in attempting to show the fallacy of this rule. It appears to be well settled,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Mullaly v. . People of the State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Anson v. DwightSupreme Court of Iowa · 1865
- Harrington v. MilesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1873
- State v. PhippsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
- Commonwealth v. HazelwoodCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1887
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Shadoan v. BarnettCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1926
- State v. ChurchillIdaho Supreme Court · 1909
- Commonwealth v. FlynnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
- Mendenhall v. StruckSupreme Court of Iowa · 1929
- McChesney v. WilsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.