Kee v. McSweeney
New York Supreme Court
Where, in an action to recover penalties for violation of the excise laws, the complaint charged that the plaintiffs were overseers of the poor, &c., and that the defendant was, on the 12th day of May, 1883, keeper and proprietor of a hotel known as the “Mansion House,” in the town named, and on that day at said hotel, in violation of the provisions of chapter 628 of the Laws of 1857, and the statutes amendatory thereof, he “ sold strong and spirituous liquors and wines in…
Read the full summary
Where, in an action to recover penalties for violation of the excise laws, the complaint charged that the plaintiffs were overseers of the poor, &c., and that the defendant was, on the 12th day of May, 1883, keeper and proprietor of a hotel known as the “Mansion House,” in the town named, and on that day at said hotel, in violation of the provisions of chapter 628 of the Laws of 1857, and the statutes amendatory thereof, he “ sold strong and spirituous liquors and wines in quantities of less than five gallons at a time, viz., one gill of brandy, one gill of whisky, one gill of gin, one gill…
1Opinion of the CourtBockes, J.
— Motion for order requiring the plaintiffs to make the complaint more definite and certain, or for bill of particulars.
The action is brought to recover penalties for violation of the excise laws. The complaint contains twenty counts or separate causes of action, and a recovery is claimed for one penalty of fifty dollars under each count. The counts are alike in all respects, except as to the day on which the several offenses against the statute are alleged to have been committed. The first is charged to have been committed May 12, 1883, and the other offenses on each subsequent day to and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wood v. WoodNew York Court of Chancery · 1830
- Thayer v. LewisNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- People v. BrooksNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- Young v. De MottNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- Tiffany v. DriggsNew York Supreme Court · 1816
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Wray v. Pennsylvania R. Co.New York Supreme Court · 1888
- United States v. Fong HingDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 1911