Legal Opinion

City of Faribault v. Wilson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 14, 1885PublishedCited by 7 opinions

' Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Eice county.

1Opinion of the CourtGilfillan, C. J.

The charter of the city of Faribault (Sp. Laws 1872, c. 11, subc. 3, § 3, subd. 9, p. 108, as amended by Sp. Laws 1878, c. 27, § 3, p. 243) authorizes the council “to regulate or prevent the running at large of dogs, to require license for keeping the same, and impose a fee for such license and a tax upon dogs, and authorize the destruction of the same in a summary manner when not licensed, or when at large contrary to the ordinance.” The "council passed an ordinance containing these provisions: “Section 1. That any dog, bitch, or slut, or any animal of the dog kind, owned by or being in the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Blair v. ForehandMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
  2. Mitchell v. WilliamsIndiana Supreme Court · 1866
  3. Carter v. DowWisconsin Supreme Court · 1862
  4. State v. GraffmullerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1879

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. AndersonTennessee Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Village of Litchville v. HansonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Griggs v. Mayor of MaconSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
  4. Incorporated Town of Sibley v. LastricoSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904
  5. Kidd v. ReynoldsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1899

2 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