W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. Rutkowski
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
Defendants appeal from tbe order denying tbeir motion for a new trial, there having been a verdict for plaintiff.
Tbe action was to recover tbe balance of an account for goods sold and delivered to defendant Peter W. Rutbowsld, tbe two other defendants being bis guarantors. Tbe amount sued for is conceded correct and tbe guaranty is admitted. Tbe answers of tbe guarantors and of tbe principal debtor seek to set up a defense that tbe goods sold and delivered were intoxicating liquors and were sold in violation of the Federal and state prohibition laws. The defendant Peter W. Rutkowski also…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Leslie v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922
- McConnon & Co. v. MeadowsMississippi Supreme Court · 1925
- Welch v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924
- Honaker v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924
3Cited by4 opinions
- Freitag v. The Strand of Atlantic City, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1953
- Furst v. ShowsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
- W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. ShogrenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1934
- Habedank v. BakerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932