Hamilton v. Jos. Schlitz Brewing Co.
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Lmn District Court.— Hon. W. N. Treichler, Judge. Action under tbe statute of tbis state to recover moneys paid by plaintiff to the defendant Jos. Schlitz Brewing Company as the purchase price of intoxicating liquors, sold, as alleged, by said company to plaintiff in this state, contrary to the laws thereof. There was a jury trial, resulting in a verdict and judgment in favor of defendants. The plaintiff appeals.—
1Opinion of the CourtBishop, J.
• The statute provision upon which this action is based is a part of the general chapter. of the Code prohibiting the traffic in intoxicating liquor in this state on the part of all persons save those holding a permit, or coming within the provisions of the mulct law, so called, and such provision reads as follows: .“All payments or compensation for intoxicating liquor sold in violation of this chapter, . . . shall be held to have been received in violation of law, and to have been received upon a valid promise and agreement of the receiver to pay on demand to the person furnishing such…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Dows v. National Exchange Bank of MilwaukeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Merchants' National Bank of Cincinnati v. BangsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Welch v. SpiesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1897
- Wigton v. BowleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
- First National Bank v. Mount Pleasant Milling Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1897
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Scott & Mayhall v. Lubbock Grain & Coal Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1923
- Hamill v. Joseph Schlitz Brewing Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1913
- Cable Co. v. McElhoeIndiana Court of Appeals · 1915
- Cheadle v. RobertsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
- First National Bank v. CookSupreme Court of Iowa · 1915
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.