Legal Opinion

In re the Prospect Brewing Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 28, 1889No. 000PublishedCited by 11 opinions

for a mandamus to the court of quarter sessions of PHILADELPHIA COUNTY. No. 000 July Term 1889, Sup. Ct. (E. D.) On May 24, 1889, the petition of the Prospect Brewing Go. was filed in the Supreme Court representing: . That the petitioner was a body politic duly incorporated under the corporation act of April 29, 1874, P. L. 73, and the supplements thereto, under the name of The Prospect Brewing Company, for the purpose of “ the brewing of all kinds of malt liquors, and the…

Read the full summary

for a mandamus to the court of quarter sessions of PHILADELPHIA COUNTY. No. 000 July Term 1889, Sup. Ct. (E. D.) On May 24, 1889, the petition of the Prospect Brewing Go. was filed in the Supreme Court representing: . That the petitioner was a body politic duly incorporated under the corporation act of April 29, 1874, P. L. 73, and the supplements thereto, under the name of The Prospect Brewing Company, for the purpose of “ the brewing of all kinds of malt liquors, and the sale thereof;” that upon its incorporation the petitioner at once entered upon the business, the manufacture and brewing…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion,

Mr. Chief Justice Paxson :

This was a writ of alternative mandamus directed to the judges of the Court of Quarter Sessions of Philadelphia holding the license court, commanding them to show cause why they should not grant the petitioner a brewers’ license. The petition upon which the alternative writ was allowed sets forth, inter alia, that the Prospect Brewing Company is a corporation duly chartered under the laws of this state for the purpose of the brewing of all kinds of malt liquors and the sale thereof; that the capital stock of said corporation is $200,000, which has been fully…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Commonwealth ex rel. Middleton v. CommissionersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1860
  2. Reichenbach v. RuddachSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Goldman v. Trans-United Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  2. Douglas v. McLeanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
  3. Ex Parte BroussardCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1913
  4. Donoghue's LicenseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
  5. Indian Brewing Co.'s LicenseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API