Purity Extract & Tonic Co. v. Lynch
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the circuit court of Hinds county. Hon. W. A. Henry, Judge. Suit by the Purity Extract and Tonic Company against C. C. Lynch. Prom a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court. filed an elaborate brief contending: First. That Poinsetta does not come within prohibition statutes of the state as defined by the decisions of this court. Second.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the circuit court of Hinds county. Hon. W. A. Henry, Judge. Suit by the Purity Extract and Tonic Company against C. C. Lynch. Prom a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court. filed an elaborate brief contending: First. That Poinsetta does not come within prohibition statutes of the state as defined by the decisions of this court. Second. That if so, said statutes when prohibiting the the sale of liquids, neither distilled, fermented or otherwise intoxicating, are void under the commerce clause of the federal Constitution…
1Opinion of the CourtMayes, C. J.
The appellant brought suit in the circuit court of Hinds county against C. C. Lynch to recover the sum of five hundred dollars claimed to be due appellant by virtue of a contract which it had with Lynch and which he refused to pay. Appellant failed to recover judgment in the court below; hence prosecutes this appeal.
Only a brief statement of the facts need be made. Appellant is a corporation located in the city of Chattanooga, Tenn., and is engaged in the manufacture and sale of a beverage known as “Poinsetta.” Some time in November, 1910, appellant made a contract with Lynch, under the terms…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Booth v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- State v. Fargo Bottling Works Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
- Elder v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1909
- Pennell v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
- Luther v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1909
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Board of Trustees of University v. WaughMississippi Supreme Court · 1913
- State v. HemrichWashington Supreme Court · 1916
- Gilliam v. McLemoreMississippi Supreme Court · 1925
- Stepp v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1947
- Ford v. EasterlingMississippi Supreme Court · 1938
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.