Legal Opinion

State v. Marastoni

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided July 3, 1917PublishedCited by 12 opinions

From Multnomah: Calvin U. G-antenbbin, Judge. Joe Marastoni was convicted and fined by the municipal court of the City of Portland for violating the law relating to the manufacture of intoxicating liquors and appealed. Affirmed. Department 2. Statement by Me. Chief Justice McBeidb. The defendant was complained against in the municipal court of the City of Portland for a violation of Chapter 141 of the General Laws of 1915, relating to the manufacture of intoxicating liquor.

Read the full summary

From Multnomah: Calvin U. G-antenbbin, Judge. Joe Marastoni was convicted and fined by the municipal court of the City of Portland for violating the law relating to the manufacture of intoxicating liquors and appealed. Affirmed. Department 2. Statement by Me. Chief Justice McBeidb. The defendant was complained against in the municipal court of the City of Portland for a violation of Chapter 141 of the General Laws of 1915, relating to the manufacture of intoxicating liquor. The complaint is as follows: “The said Joe Marastoni, on the 27th day of September, A. D. 1916, in the county of…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice McBride.

1. The principal question is this case is whether the defendant “manufactured” the wine which he kept on the premises. That he pressed the juice from the grapes, put it in a vat, and permitted it to ferment by the usual natural process, with the intent to use part of it in that state as a beverage for himself and family, is admitted. As to this portion of the liquid we are of the opinion that he is guilty of a violaton of the statute. Webster’s Dictionary defines the word “manufacture” to mean, “To make (wares, machinery, or other products) by hand, by…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Mugler v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  2. Murphy v. ArnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Union Wire Rope Corporation v. Atchison, T. & SF Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1933
  2. United States v. BrunettDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1931
  3. State v. FabbriWashington Supreme Court · 1917
  4. State v. HosmerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
  5. Bain v. Department of RevenueOregon Supreme Court · 1982

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API