Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/204/320/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/204/320/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
Brown v. Walling, 204 U.S. 320 (1907)
Brown v. Walling
No. 81
Argued January 10, 1907
Decided February 4, 1907
204 U.S. 320
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
Syllabus
Decided on authority of Bacon v. Walker, ante, p. 204 U. S. 311.
9 Idaho 740 affirmed.
The facts are stated in the opinion.
MR. JUSTICE McKENNA delivered the opinion of the Court.
This action was brought in the Probate Court in and for Elmore County, State of Idaho, for the sum of $200 damages sustained by defendant in error by the violation by plaintiffs in error of §§ 1210, 1211, of the Revised Statutes of Idaho. The amended complaint alleged that the offense was committed by plaintiffs in error by wrongfully and negligently permitting and allowing their sheep to graze
within two miles of the dwelling house of defendant in error and upon the government lands around his premises. The defense, set up by demurrer, was, as in Bacon v. Walker, ante, p. 204 U. S. 311, that those sections were void under the due process and equality clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. The trial court rendered judgment for the defendant in error, which was affirmed by the District Court for Elmore County and by the supreme court of the state. 9 Idaho 740.
The case was argued with Bacon v. Walker, and, on the authority of that case, the judgment is
Affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE BREWER and MR. JUSTICE PECKHAM dissent.
