Commonwealth v. Haldeman
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Trexler, J.,
The defendant was charged with the violation of the fourth section of the Act of the 11th of May, 1921, P. L. 522, being the “Dog Law of 1921,” in that he kept in his possession three dogs over six months old, for which licenses were issued but which had no tags attached to their collars and upon a hearing held before a magistrate, he was summarily convicted.
An appeal was allowed to the Court of Quarter Sessions and at the hearing, the court found the defendant guilty and sentenced him accordingly.
The act in question which relates to dogs, provides for the licensing of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Commonwealth ex rel. Attorney General v. SnyderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Commonwealth v. AldermanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Mesta Machine Co. v. Dunbar Furnace Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Bagley Co., Inc. v. CameronSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Investor's Realty Co. v. HarrisburgSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Commonwealth v. HaldemanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Junge's Appeal. (No. 2.)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Kessler v. Mandel Et Ux.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
- Knowles's EstatePennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County · 1929