Legal Opinion

Lyman v. Brucker

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1899PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Action upon a bond given upon an application for a tax certificate under the Liquor Tax Law.

1Opinion of the CourtDavy, J.

The two principal questions presented and argued upon the motion for a nonsuit in this action are: First, That the bond upon which this action is ‘based is void, because the statute requires that it shall contain a .statement that the applicant shall not violate any of the provisions of the Liquor Tax Law, while the bond in suit requires him not to violate any of the provisions of the Liquor Tax Law or any act amendatory thereof or supplementary thereto. Second, That the evidence does not show that the defendant Brucker suffered or permitted any gambling to-be carried-on upon his premises…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Ring v. GibbsNew York Supreme Court · 1841
  2. People ex rel. Meakim v. EckmanNew York Supreme Court · 1892
  3. State v. GrimesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Lyman v. Shenandoah Social ClubAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
  2. Kirkpatrick v. PhillipsMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Commonwealth v. HollandsDauphin County Court of Quarter Sessions · 1924
  4. Cullinan v. KuchNew York Supreme Court · 1902
  5. Lyman v. PerlmutterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900

1 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