Commonwealth v. McDermott

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. McDermott

73 A. 427, 224 Pa. 362, 1908 Pa. LEXIS 647

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 12, 1908·No. No. 1; Appeals, Nos. 194 and 195·Published·Cited by 24 cases

Opinion

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Brown,

These appeals were manifestly taken for the purpose of re-arguing the question of the constitutionality of the Act of May 29,1901, P. L. 327, prohibiting the manufacture and sale of oleomargarine, butterine and other similar products when colored in imitation of yellow butter. We ought hardly to be again called upon to declare that act constitutional. In Commonwealth v. Caulfield, 211 Pa. 644, we said there was no reason “why we should stuff the reports” with a repetition of the decisions sustaining it.

The assignments of error are overruled and the judgments of the Superior Court are affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Brown,

These appeals were manifestly taken for the purpose of re-arguing the question of the constitutionality of the Act of May 29,1901, P. L. 327, prohibiting the manufacture and sale of oleomargarine, butterine and other similar products when colored in imitation of yellow butter. We ought hardly to be again called upon to declare that act constitutional. In Commonwealth v. Caulfield, 211 Pa. 644, we said there was no reason “why we should stuff the reports” with a repetition of the decisions sustaining it.

The assignments of error are overruled and the judgments of the Superior Court are affirmed.

Commonwealth v. McDermott, 73 A. 427, 224 Pa. 362, 1908 Pa. LEXIS 647 (Pa. 1908).

Pincite

73 A. 427 (Commonwealth v. McDermott) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related