Houston v. State
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Actio:»- commenced in supreme court. The defendant demurred to the complaint. This action was commenced in this court June 29, 1897. The amended complaint alleges, in effect, that during the time mentioned the plaintiff was a farmer, residing on his farm in the county of Itenosha; that he owned and had on the farm a standard herd of dairy cattle, consisting of sixty head of thoroughbred milch cows, Jerseys and Guernseys,, and crosses of the thoroughbred cattle; that by ch.…
Read the full summary
Actio:»- commenced in supreme court. The defendant demurred to the complaint. This action was commenced in this court June 29, 1897. The amended complaint alleges, in effect, that during the time mentioned the plaintiff was a farmer, residing on his farm in the county of Itenosha; that he owned and had on the farm a standard herd of dairy cattle, consisting of sixty head of thoroughbred milch cows, Jerseys and Guernseys,, and crosses of the thoroughbred cattle; that by ch. 4G7, Laws of 1835, as amended by ch. 76, Laws of 1887, provision was and is made for the appointment of a state…
1Opinion of the CourtCassoday, C. J.
It is not specifically alleged that the plaintiff accepted the two thirds of $1,710, at which the ■cattle so destroyed were appraised; but such acceptance, ■under the circumstances alleged, may be fairly inferred, and :in fact seemed to be conceded on the argument. The view we have taken of the case, however, makes it unimportant.
It is fairly established, by adjudications too numerous to mention, that a state may, in the proper exercise of its police power, authorize the destruction of such property as has become a public nuisance, or has an unlawful existence, or is noxious to the public…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Mugler v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Lawton v. SteeleSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Kidd v. PearsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Schillinger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Louisiana v. JumelSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Holytz v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Texas Highway Department v. WeberTexas Supreme Court · 1949
- Rome v. London & Lancashire Indemnity Co. of AmericaLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1936
- Boldt v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1981
- State v. Mutual Life InsuranceIndiana Supreme Court · 1910
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.