State v. Field
Supreme Court of Vermont
Complaint for selling and furnishing milk diluted with water. Plea, not guilty. Trial by jury in the Burlington City Court, Chittenden County, Jed P. Ladd, City Judge. Verdict and judgment of guilty. The respondent excepted. The opinion states the case.
1Opinion of the CourtSlack, J.
The respondent stands convicted of selling and furnishing milk diluted with W’ater in violation of' G-. L. 5907. *377The sale complained of was to Charles Soules and Lucius White, who were operating a creamery under the firm name of Soules & White, and was made November 7, 1920.
One Murray carried the respondent’s milk, milk that belonged to one Bisson, and his own, to the creamery each morning. Murray was hired by the respondent to carry the latter’s milk to the creamery. The respondent claims that if his milk was diluted when delivered to the creamery it was diluted by Murray after it left…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- People v. RobyMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Williams v. Mayor of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1853
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1920
- City of Paducah v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1907
- State v. BarrSupreme Court of Vermont · 1905
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- People v. SchwartzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
- State v. Coomer, Jr.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1933
- In Re Estate of JonesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1939
- State v. BonillaSupreme Court of Vermont · 1984
- State v. HolcombSupreme Court of Vermont · 1991
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.