Legal Opinion

State v. Campbell

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided December 5, 1887PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.

The offence for which the respondent is indicted is, first, selling adulterated milk; second, selling milk from which part of the cream had been removed; third, selling milk from which all the cream had been removed, — in violation of c. 42, Laws of 1883, entitled “An act to regulate the sale and inspection of milk.” Section 5 prohibits the sale of adulterated-milk, or milk to which water or any foreign substance has , been added. Section 6 prohibits tbe sale of milk from which the cream or a part thereof has been removed, as' pure milk. Section 7 regulates the sale of skimmed milk.. Section…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. . WestNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
  2. People v. . CipperlyNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
  3. Commonwealth v. EvansMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
  4. Commonwealth v. LuscombMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Melendez-Diaz v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. State v. SchlenkerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1900
  3. Campbell v. City of ThomasvilleCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1909
  4. Johnson v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1938
  5. Monroe v. City of LawrenceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1890

13 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