Legal Opinion
State v. McKay
Tennessee Supreme Court
Decided December 15, 1916PublishedCited by 17 opinions
FROM DAVIDSON. Appeal from the Criminal Court of Davidson County. — A. B. Neil> Judge.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Williams
The defendants in error were indicted for a violation of Act 1909, chapter 395, known as the Pure Seed Law. A motion to quash on the ground that the act is unconstitutional was sustained by the court, and the State has appealed and assigned errors.
An outline of the act follows, the portions against which the attacks are directed being quoted in full; other sections not being set forth in such detail:
*284“Section 1. That every parcel, package, or lot of agricultural seeds as hereafter defined in this act, and containing one pound or more, offered or exposed for sale in the State of Tennessee, for…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Gibbons v. OgdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Connolly v. Union Sewer Pipe Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
- County of Mobile v. KimballSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Savage v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Rast v. Van Deman & Lewis Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Ogilvie v. HaileyTennessee Supreme Court · 1918
- Darnell v. ShapardTennessee Supreme Court · 1928
- Rutherford v. City of NashvilleTennessee Supreme Court · 1935
- Arutanoff v. Metropolitan GovernmentTennessee Supreme Court · 1969
- Marshall v. Department of AgricultureIdaho Supreme Court · 1927
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.