Legal Opinion

Morehouse v. Crilley

New York Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1853PublishedCited by 3 opinions

The action is brought for the recovery of numerous penalties for a violation of the excise laws. The defendant demurs to the complaint.

1Opinion of the Court

Barculo, Justice.

I am glad to perceive that the attorney in this case has been able to state briefly, in his demurrer, the reasons why, or particular in which, the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. He seems to have done it, too, without a great deal of difficulty, notwithstanding some of my brethren consider it such a herculean task, that it ought not to be imposed upon a Code lawyer.

The material objection to the complaint is that “it does not state the place where, the time when, the kind or quantity of liquor sold by the defendant, or that any liquor…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bigelow v. JohnsonNew York Supreme Court · 1816
  2. Cole v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1809

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. OwsleyMontana Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Gunst v. GoldsteinNew York Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Abbott v. New York CentralThe Superior Court of New York City · 1872

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

Powered by the Exa API