Legal Opinion

State v. Cadigan

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided May 17, 1901PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Information in four counts under V. S. 4133. Heard on demurrer to the information, Windsor County, December Term, 1899, Tyler, J., presiding. The demurrer was ovem ruled, the information held sufficient and the respondent adjudged guilty. The respondent excepted.

1Opinion of the CourtStafford, J.

Cadigan is informed against for acting as agent of a partnership organized under the laws of the state of New York, in selling certain municipal bonds here, without said partnership having complied with the statute of this state requiring firms organized under the laws of other states to procure a license from the inspector of finance, to file a bond with him, and to submit to his examination, before conducting such business here. The case was heard below on demurrer to the information, which was held sufficient. The decision depends upon the constitutionality of sections of chapter 175 of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Yick Wo v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. State v. HoytSupreme Court of Vermont · 1898

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Baker v. StateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1999
  2. State v. AuclairSupreme Court of Vermont · 1939
  3. Benning v. StateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1994
  4. State v. MitchellSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1902
  5. State v. ShedroiSupreme Court of Vermont · 1903

11 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