Tenney v. Lenz
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Bane County. Action in justice’s court brought by the plaintiff as chair man of the board of supervisors of the town of Madison, under chapt. 175 of the laws of 1860, to recover damages for the killing of sheep by the defendant’s dog.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Bane County. Action in justice’s court brought by the plaintiff as chair man of the board of supervisors of the town of Madison, under chapt. 175 of the laws of 1860, to recover damages for the killing of sheep by the defendant’s dog. The complaint alleges that on the 11th of May, 1861, two dogs, one kept by the defendant and the other by one Greenbaum, came into the town of Madison, and there attacked and worried a flock of sheep belonging to Abel Dunning of said town, and there hilled fourteen lambs of said flock, doing damage to the amount of $40; that…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Paine, J.
It seems to us very clear that chap. 175, of the Laws of 1860, is an exercise of the police power of the state and not of its taxing power. Dogs, though possessing many excellent qualities, are liable by running mad and destroying sheep to do great mischief. Hence it is strictly a legitimate exercise of the police power, “ to regulate and license the keeping of dogs,” as was done by the act referred to.
This being so, we cannot assent to the position taken by the appellant, that if the sum required for a license exceeds the expense of issuing it, the act transcends the…
2Cited by29 opinions
- Nunnemacher v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1906
- Van Hook v. City of SelmaSupreme Court of Alabama · 1881
- Fox v. Mohawk & Hudson River Humane SocietyNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
- Standard Chemical & Oil Co. v. City of TroySupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
- Comm'rs of Ottawa Co. v. NelsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.