State v. Mitchell
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from circuit court, Lake county. Hon. F. R. Aikens, Judge. Proceeding to punish defendant for contempt in violating an injunction order of the court. Defendant adjudged guilty, and was punished by fine and imprisonment. Defendant appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. Chapter 101, Laws of 1890, is unconstitutional as a whole, for the reason that the title of the act and the act itself embraces two distinct subjects, viz., prohibition and regulation.
Read the full summary
Appeal from circuit court, Lake county. Hon. F. R. Aikens, Judge. Proceeding to punish defendant for contempt in violating an injunction order of the court. Defendant adjudged guilty, and was punished by fine and imprisonment. Defendant appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. Chapter 101, Laws of 1890, is unconstitutional as a whole, for the reason that the title of the act and the act itself embraces two distinct subjects, viz., prohibition and regulation. Section 21, art. 3, Constitution of South Dakota; Cooley, Const. Lim. 180; Antonia v. Gould, 34 Tex. 49; State v. McCracken, 42 Id.…
1Opinion of the CourtKellam, P. J.
This was a proceeding to punish the defendant and appellant for contempt in violating an injunction order made in an action pending in the circuit court for the county of Lake, in which the state was plaintiff and appellant was defendant. The action was instituted under chapter 101, Laws 1890, prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors, and sought to restrain and vacate a place alleged to have been kept and used for the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors by defendant, Mitchell. While such action was pending, and while an injunction order therein was in full force, commanding defendant to…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Eilenbecker v. District Court of Plymouth CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- State v. BeckerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1892
- Sinclair v. Jackson ex dem. FieldCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1826
- Albany City Bank v. SchermerhornNew York Court of Chancery · 1842
- Gandy v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1882
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Merchants' Stock & Grain Co. v. Board of Trade of ChicagoCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1912
- In re WatsonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1903
- State v. PiperSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2006
- Freeman v. City of HuronSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1896
- State v. KirbySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1914
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.