Hirth-Krause Co. v. Cohen
Indiana Supreme Court
Prom St. Joseph Circuit Court; Walter A. Funk, Judge. Action by Hirth-Krause Company and another against Philip Cohen and others. Prom a judgment for defendants, plaintiffs appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtMorris, C. J.
Suit by appellants against appellees, under the bulk-sales act of 1909 (Acts 1909 p. 122).
The circuit court sustained a demurrer to the complaint, and appellants declined to plead further. Prom the judgment rendered, this appeal is prosecuted. The only error assigned here is the sustaining of the demurrer to the complaint.
The action of the. lower court was based on the theory that the foregoing act is unconstitutional. Only the one question is involved in the appeal. If the act is constitutional, the judgment should be reversed; otherwise it should be affirmed.
The act in question is a…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- State v. GerhardtIndiana Supreme Court · 1896
- Booth v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Bedford Quarries Co. v. BoughIndiana Supreme Court · 1907
- Wright v. . HartNew York Court of Appeals · 1905
- Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. MontgomeryIndiana Supreme Court · 1898
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Collins v. DayIndiana Supreme Court · 1994
- Fountain Park Co. v. HenslerIndiana Supreme Court · 1927
- Railroad Commission v. Grand Trunk Western RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1913
- Schmitt v. F. W. Cook Brewing Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1918
- Klein v. . MaravelasNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.