Legal Opinion

State v. Shady

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided February 2, 1927PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPowers, J.

The respondent was convicted of tapping the wares of the Montpelier & Barre Light and Power Corporation and using electric current therefrom without the consent of that corporation. Under an exception saved when, at the close of the evidence, his motion for a directed verdict was overruled, he challenges the constitutionality of the statute under which he is charged (G-. L. 6973) on the ground that it is repugnant to the equality provisions of both State and federal Constitutions.

The respondent’s real ground of complaint is that this statute makes it a crime to so use the current from a line…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
  2. Buchanan v. WarleySupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  3. Rast v. Van Deman & Lewis Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
  4. Crescent Cotton Oil Co. v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  5. Quong Ham Wah Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Clark v. City of BurlingtonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1928
  2. Cuthbertson v. Union Pacific Coal Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1936
  3. State v. ShadySupreme Court of Vermont · 1927

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

Powered by the Exa API