DeBoard v. Williams
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Mahaslca District Court. — Hon. John F. Talbott, Judge. The board of supervisors of Mahaska county found the statement of general consent for the sale of intoxicating liquors in the city of Oskaloosa insufficient. This finding was reversed by the district court, and from its order an appeal taken.
1Opinion of the CourtLadd, J.
j. Intoxicating liquors: canvass of consent: publica I. The poll books of the last preceding election disclosed that 2,363 electors cast their ballots in the city of ©skaloosa, and the last census indicated that its population numbers more than 5,000. A ma- • iority of such electors, or 1,182, or more, then must have signed their names to the general statement of consent, in order to authorize the sale of intoxicating liquors in that city under the provisions of the mulct law. Section 2448, Code. On December 7, 1910, a general statement of consent, purporting to be signed by 1,451 electors…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hemmer v. BonsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
- Porter v. ButterfieldSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
- Green v. SmithSupreme Court of Iowa · 1900
- State ex rel. Streissguth v. GeibSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- Loomis v. BaileySupreme Court of Iowa · 1877
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- King v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1919
- State v. HarrisonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1913
- Taft v. SnoufferSupreme Court of Iowa · 1912
- Foster v. CrismanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1914
- Barber v. DeFordSupreme Court of Iowa · 1914
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.