State v. Eckenrode
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Johnson District Court. — Hon. B. P. Howell, 'Judge. Defendant was accused of a violation of what is known as the state pure food law. Upon trial in the district court he was acquitted, and the state appeals.—
1Opinion of the CourtDeemer, C. J.
The case was tried on an agreed statement of facts and the only questions argued by counsel are whether or not, on the agreed facts, defendant was engaged in interstate commerce. The Attorney-General doncedes that if he was so engaged the judgment is correct, and should be’ sustained. In view of this concession we are relieved of the necessity of determining whether or not the state, in the exercise of its police power, may not prohibit the sale of misbranded goods, although they may be the subject of interstate commerce and be sold in unbroken packages. The concession is bottomed in ■ part…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Swift & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Brown v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
- Robbins v. Shelby County Taxing DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Leisy v. HardinSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- County of Mobile v. KimballSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Johnston v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1929
- First National Bank v. WilliamsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
- State v. C. C. Taft Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. City of Fort MadisonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1960
- State v. C. C. Taft Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1918