People v. Bootman
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the plaintiff, The People of the State of New York, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendants, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Rew York On the 12th day of December, 1903, upon- the dismissal of the complaint by direction of the court after a trial at the Rew York Trial Term, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 10th day of December, 1903, granting the defendants an additional .•allowance.
1Dissent
McLaughlin, J. (dissenting):
I am unable to concur in the prevailing opinion. The possession of the birds at the time alleged in the complaint and stated in the stipulation was, under the Forest, Fish and Game Law, unlawful (Laws of 1900, chap. 20, § 22, as amd. by Laws, of 1901, chap. 396; Id. *477§§ 23, 25, as amd. by Laws of 1900, chap. 601; Id., § 28), and by reason thereof the defendants were liable to the penalty specified in section 39 of that act (as amd. by Laws of 1900, chap. 741). The act is not unconstitutional. (Phelps v. Racey, 60 N. Y. 10; People v. Buffalo Fish Co., 164 id. 93.)…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Leisy v. HardinSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- In Re RahrerSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Rhodes v. IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Ex parte MaierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Phelps v. . RaceyNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.