Legal Opinion

Peacock v. Limburger

Texas Supreme Court

Decided February 27, 1902No. 1074PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Question certified from the Court of Civil Appeals for the Fourth District, in an appeal from Bexar County.

1Opinion of the Court

WILLIAMS, Associate Justice.

Certified questions from Court of Civil Appeals for the Fourth District, as follows:

“In October, 1900, defendant Limburger, a saloon keeper in San Antonio, through his employes, sold beer to two students of appellant’s school for boys. The action is by Peacock, the proprietor of said institution of learning, against Limburger and the sureties on his liquor dealer’s bond which was in force and conditioned as the law required at that time, to recover the penalty of $500 in reference to each of said students, upon the ground of their being at the time students of his…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State ex rel. McClory v. DonovanNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1901
  2. McGuire v. GlassCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1890

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Philip A. Ryan Lumber Co. v. BallCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
  2. Tinkle v. SweeneyTexas Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Price v. WakehamCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1908
  4. A. E. Holly & Co. v. SimmonsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1905
  5. Pustejovsky v. LodgeTexas Supreme Court · 1935

4 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