United States v. Wandmaker
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the District ■of North Dakota. ' Action by the United States against John Wandmaker and another. Judgment for defendants, and the United States brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
LEWIS, Circuit Judge.
This is an action against the principal and surety on a bond which the former was required to give by the National Prohibition Act, tit. 2, '§§ 4 and 6 (41 Stat. 305, 309, 310), and the regulations of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue prescribing its form and amount. It appears from the complaint that Wandmaker, the principal, applied for and was granted permits pursuant to those sections and regulations, to purchase and use alcohol, in the manufacture of Wandmaker’s Dandruff Remedy, Wandmaker’s Quinine Tonic, Bay Rum and other compounds of alcoholic content. The…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Clark v. BarnardSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Farnsworth, Trustees v. Minnesota and Pacific Railroad CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- United States v. DieckerhoffSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Illinois Surety Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1916
- City of Paducah v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1907
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Commonwealth v. J. & A. Moeschlin, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- State v. Vending Machine Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
- City of St. Cloud v. WillenbringSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
- United States v. EngelbergDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1924
- United States v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 1924
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.