Eilke v. MGrath
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 75 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT, COMMON PLEAS DIVISION. 1. The sale must be made by the saloon-keeper knowing the buyer to be an inebriate, and no such knowledge is brought home to appellants in this case. (Com. v. Bell, 14 Bush, 433.) 2. The uncontradicted evidence shows that there was no. partnership, and that Wm.
Read the full summary
Case 75 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT, COMMON PLEAS DIVISION. 1. The sale must be made by the saloon-keeper knowing the buyer to be an inebriate, and no such knowledge is brought home to appellants in this case. (Com. v. Bell, 14 Bush, 433.) 2. The uncontradicted evidence shows that there was no. partnership, and that Wm. Eilke, Sr., had no interest in or connection with the business, and yet judgment was rendered against both upon the idea that they were partners. 3. The deposition of Herndon was improperly permitted to be read. At the time it was taken he was a…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE PAYNTER
delivered t.he opinion of the coubt:
Section 2, act March 6, 1878 (General Statutes, page 462; sec. 1307, Ky. Stats.), provides that it shall not be *539lawful for any person having a license to sell spirituous, vinous or malt liquors by the drink or otherwise to sell, give or loan any such liquors or the mixture of either knowingly to any person who is an inebriate or m the habit of becoming intoxicated or drunk by the use of any of such liquors, or to suffer or permit any such person to drink any of such liquors or the mixture of either in his barroom, saloon, or in or upon any…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Keyser v. DamronCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1914
- Jackson County ex rel. Farley v. SchmidMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- State v. ProvencherSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915