United States v. E. & S. Motor Transp. Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
CABBEY, District Judge.
The allegations of paragraphs 3 to 6 of the complaint, which were in part denied in the answer, have been satisfactorily established by affidavits. Indeed, their truth is now conceded in the brief of the defendants. The defense in paragraph 7 of the answer that there was no demand prior to suit was withdrawn by the defendants at the oral argument and has not been mentioned in the defendants’ brief. This leaves for determination only the question as to whether the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment, as set up in paragraph 6 of the answer, is a defense.
According to the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. ChambersSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Steamship Co. v. JoliffeSupreme Court of the United States · 1865
- Coombes v. GetzSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- United States v. MackDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1934
3Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. MackCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934