Legal Opinion

Hoffman Candy & Ice Cream Co. v. Department of Liquor Control

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 16, 1950No. 32163PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTaft, J.

Since the department filed no bill of exceptions, the question before the Court of Appeals was and the question before this court is whether the Common Pleas Court was justified, on the allegations stated in plaintiff’s petition, in granting to the plaintiff the relief, by way of injunction and specific performance, prayed for by that petition. On this appeal, therefore, we must assume that all the material allegations set forth in the petition are true.

Section 6064-11, General Code (116 Ohio Laws, pt. 2, 226), provided for the establishment of “state liquor stores or agencies” and provided,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Poet Clinton Railroad v. Cleveland & Toledo RailroadOhio Supreme Court · 1862
  2. New York Central Rd. v. City of BucyrusOhio Supreme Court · 1933
  3. State Ex Rel. Fisher v. FergusonOhio Supreme Court · 1943

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Cedar Fair, L.P. v. Falfas (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
  2. BCL Enterprises, Inc. v. Ohio Department of Liquor ControlOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Kully v. GoldmanNebraska Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Felch v. Findlay CollegeOhio Court of Appeals · 1963
  5. BCL Enterprises, Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Liquor ControlOhio Supreme Court · 1997

4 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