Qualls v. City of Anchorage
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
NESBETT, Chief Justice.
Appellant was tried and convicted in the magistrate court on charges of failure to restrain his dog and of failure to restrain a vicious dog in a secure enclosure, both offenses being violations of ordinances of the city of Anchorage.
Appeal was taken to the Superior Court of the Third District, at Anchorage. After a trial de novo that court affirmed the judgment of the magistrate and appeal was taken to this court.
Three points are raised, namely, that the evidence was insufficient to support the judgment of conviction on each charge; that the court erred in not…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hanrahan v. City of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 1962
3Cited by2 opinions
- City of St. Paul v. WhidbySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
- Kropiwka v. Department of Industry, Labor & Human RelationsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979