Pilsen Products Co. v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
PAGE, Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal from a decree closing appellants’ brewery as a nuisance, for violation of the National Prohibition Act (Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, § 10138¼ et seq.).
1. It is urged that there should be no decree in abatement, because “the remedy at la,w is adequate and has not been exhausted.” Prom the whole argument, this seems not to be seriously insisted on. It is also urged that there are pending indictments against defendants involving the same offenses, and that the decree in this ease will bo prejudicial in tbe trial under the indictments. Even though that might…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Peter Hand Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1924
- Kryptok Co. v. Haussmann & Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1914
3Cited by2 opinions
- Liu v. Hopkins County Sulphur Springs, TexasDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- United States v. De NeenDistrict Court, D. Montana · 1933