Legal Opinion

Danciger v. Crooks

District Court, W.D. Missouri

Decided June 8, 1926No. 589PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

REEVES, District Judge.

By their bill in equity, plaintiffs seek to have the defendants permanently enjoined from the assessment of penalties prescribed in section 35, tit. 2, of the National Prohibition Act (Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, § 10138%v).. It is alleged in the bill that plaintiffs were notified by the defendants on July 23, 1924, that an assessment of taxes and penalties was proposed to be made against them on account of the illegal sales of intoxicating liquor which, it is claimed, were made on or about October 21, 1922.

Perforce said section 35, tit. 2, of the National Prohibition…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lipke v. LedererSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  2. Regal Drug Corp. v. WardellSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  3. Jasper v. HellmichDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1925

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Copeland v. Nevada Southern Detention CenterDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API