Legal Opinion

City of Seattle v. Barto

Washington Supreme Court

Decided February 25, 1903No. 4317PublishedCited by 23 opinions

Appeal from Superior Court, King County.- — -Hon. Arthur E. Griffih, Judge.

1Opinion of the Court

'Tlie opinion of the court was delivered by

Fullerton, C. J.

— The appellant was convicted of the •offense of engaging in the business of a pawnbroker in the ■city of Seattle without first having procured a license therefor, as required by an ordinance of the city, and from the judgment of conviction appeals. The question presented by the record is the validity of the ordinance under which the conviction was had. The several objections made we shall notice in order.

It is said first that the ordinance contains more than one ■object. The charter of the city of Seattle (Freeholders’ 1896, art. 4,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Marston v. HumesWashington Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Lancey v. King CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Davis-Smith Co. v. ClausenWashington Supreme Court · 1911
  2. State v. Seattle Taxicab & Transfer, Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Kimmel v. City of SpokaneWashington Supreme Court · 1941
  4. State v. SharplessWashington Supreme Court · 1903
  5. Carstens v. DeSellemWashington Supreme Court · 1914

18 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