State v. McConnell
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Indictment, to recover a forfeiture of fifteen dollars for keeping a dog without a license. The defendant moved to dismiss the indictment for the. following reasons: 1. “ Because the statute points out a particular mode to recover the forfeiture, viz.: by complaint to a justice of a police court.” 2. “Because by force of sections 10 and 11, chapter 257, of the Public Statutes, no indictment can be found in said case within one year after said forfeiture accrues, and the…
Read the full summary
Indictment, to recover a forfeiture of fifteen dollars for keeping a dog without a license. The defendant moved to dismiss the indictment for the. following reasons: 1. “ Because the statute points out a particular mode to recover the forfeiture, viz.: by complaint to a justice of a police court.” 2. “Because by force of sections 10 and 11, chapter 257, of the Public Statutes, no indictment can be found in said case within one year after said forfeiture accrues, and the forfeiture in this case has not accrued one year.” 8. “ Because the defendant has already been subjected to the expense and…
1Opinion of the CourtParsons, J.
Chapter 60, Laws 1891, “An act to prevent the destruction of sheep and other damages by dogs,” imposes for violation of its various provisions a fine of not less than ten nor more than fifty dollars (s. 9); a fine of twenty-five dollars (s. 21) ; and a fine of one hundred dollars (s. 22). Section 8, under which this indictment is found, is: “ Whoever keeps a dog contrary to the provisions of this chapter shall forfeit fifteen dollars, five dollars of which shall he paid to the complainant, and ten dollars to the treasurer of the city or town in which the dog is kept.” Section 24 is: “All…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Washington County v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1845
- Commonwealth v. HaynesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Commonwealth v. AveryCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1879
- State v. PateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1853
- Ex parte AlexanderMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- State v. CorronSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1905
- Second National Bank of New Haven v. LoftusSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1936
- Frazier v. TerrillArizona Supreme Court · 1946
- United States v. Tom WahDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1908
- Holliman v. ColeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.