Sharp v. Arnold
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Diclcinson District Gourt. — HoN. W. B. Quar-toN, Judge. ActioN to enjoin a nuisance caused by the sale of intoxicating liquors. Prom a decree granting the relief prayed, the defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtWatbrmaN, J.
— The defense in this case is that no nuisance existed at the time tbis action was begun. The original'notice was served September 8, 1897, and the petition was hid on the twenty-fifth day of the same month. The evidence shows the sale of beer by defendant on the premises at different times, the last of which was July 4, 1897. Defendant was a witness, and testified, in substance, that he had ceased selling intoxicating liquors prior to the -commencement of this action; that the last sale was the one spoken of, in July. This testimony is in no way controverted. If no nuisance existed when the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Judge v. KribsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1887
- Shear v. BrinkmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1887
- State v. SeversonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893
3Cited by8 opinions
- Dougherty v. City of SiouxSupreme Court of Iowa · 1954
- State ex rel. Kern v. JeromeWashington Supreme Court · 1914
- Tuttle v. BuntingSupreme Court of Iowa · 1910
- Black v. State ex rel. District Attorney-GeneralTennessee Supreme Court · 1914
- Hammond v. KingSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.