Green v. . Petersen
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department,' entered November 5, 1915, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material are stated in the opinion. 1 The action is barred by the limitation of nine months provided in section 16 of the Liquor Tax Law. (People ex rel. Hill v. United Surety Co., 120 App.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department,' entered November 5, 1915, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material are stated in the opinion. 1 The action is barred by the limitation of nine months provided in section 16 of the Liquor Tax Law. (People ex rel. Hill v. United Surety Co., 120 App. Div. 655, Lyman v. Shenandoah, 39 App. Div. 459; Lyman v. B. G. Hotel Co., 33 App. Div. 130; Brown v. Houdlette, 10 Maine, 399; Davis v.…
1Opinion of the CourtCardozo, J.
The action is on a bond filed under the Liquor Tax Law with the state commissioner of excise (Liquor Tax Law, § 16; Consol. Laws, ch. 34). The condition is that “ the said principal * * *, while the business, for which said liquor tax certificate is given, shall be carried on, * * * will not violate any of the provisions of" the Liquor Tax Law, or any act amendatory thereof, or supplementary thereto. ” The charge is that the law was violated by the sale of liquor on Sunday, January 18, 1914, and again on Sunday, September 20, and Sunday, September 27, of the same year. This action was begun…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Secor v. . SturgisNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Perry v. . DickersonNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Kennedy v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
- Lorillard v. . ClydeNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- McKim v. GloverMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Singer Co., Link Simulation Systems Division v. Baltimore Gas & Electric Co.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1989
- Markota v. East Ohio Gas Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1951
- Universal Life & Accident Insurance v. ShawTexas Supreme Court · 1942
- Crowder v. Master Financial, Inc.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2007
- In re the Estate of SteinwayNew York Surrogate's Court · 1940