Commonwealth v. Lagorio
This text of 6 N.E. 546 (Commonwealth v. Lagorio) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. The motion to quash was rightly overruled, for two reasons; it was made too late, and the complaint is sufficient. Commonwealth v. Rowe, ante, 79. 2. The license of the defendant as a hawker and pedler did not authorize him to violate a lawful police regulation of the city of Boston. Commonwealth v. Fenton, 139 Mass. 195. 3. It is not necessary that the regulation upon which the complaint is founded should be approved by the Superior Court, or a justice thereof. The Pub. Sts. c. 27, § 21, do not apply to the ordinances or regulations of the board of aldermen of the city of Boston. Commonwealth v. Davis, 140 Mass. 485.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
6 N.E. 546, 141 Mass. 81, 1886 Mass. LEXIS 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-lagorio-mass-1886.