Legal Opinion

Perkins v. Hattery, Dog Warden

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided June 3, 1958No. 448PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Per curiam

This appeal on questions of law and fact is from the judgment in an action in the Court of Common Pleas by the owner of a licensed dog to enjoin the duly appointed county dog warden from hilling, destroying, or otherwise disposing of, the dog. The cause was tried de novo in this court on the transcript of evidence adduced in the court below.

It is either admitted or undisputed that the defendant is a duly appointed county dog warden, that the dog is a licensed dog owned by the plaintiff, that the dog was seized on its owner’s premises by defendant dog warden approximately nine hours after…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Uebele v. StateOhio Court of Appeals · 1926

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. LilliockOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Searcy v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1980
  3. State v. BaumholtzOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Readd v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
  5. State v. ArgeaCanton Municipal Court · 1989

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API