Legal Opinion
In Re Perham
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided September 28, 1962No. 5052PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLampron, J.
It is well established that the purpose of statutes such as RSA ch. 169 “is not penal, but protective. It is not that the child shall be punished for breach of a law or regulation, but that he shall have a better chance to become a worthy citizen.” State v. Lefebvre, 91 N. H. 382, 384. Such an act “is designed to permit the exercise of the powers of the state as ‘parens patriae’ for the purpose of rehabilitating minor children.” Petition of Morin, 95 N. H. 518, 520; In re Poulin, 100 N. H. 458; State v. Monahan, 15 N. J. 34; Holmes’ Appeal, 379 Pa. 599. By chapter 169 the municipal court is…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Holmes' AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- Metcalf v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1959
- In Re GomezSupreme Court of Vermont · 1943
- Sylvester v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925
3Cited by10 opinions
- McKeiver v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Ginn v. Superior Court, in and for County of PimaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1965
- State v. SmagulaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1977
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1984
- State v. MattielloConnecticut Appellate Court · 1966
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.