Drake v. Kaiser
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Wapello District Court — Hon. H. 0. Traverse, Judge. Action in equity, brought by a citizen of the county, to restrain and enjoin the defendants from maintaining a nuisance. The proceeding is prosecuted under the statute for the suppression of intemperance.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Wapello District Court — Hon. H. 0. Traverse, Judge. Action in equity, brought by a citizen of the county, to restrain and enjoin the defendants from maintaining a nuisance. The proceeding is prosecuted under the statute for the suppression of intemperance. The defendants answered that before the enactment of the statute, and at a time when the sale of beer was lawful, they expended a large sum of money in fitting up the building and place now occupied by them as a beer saloon; that the building as so fitted up is,of much greater value for that than for any other use to which it…
1Opinion of the Court
Reed, «T.
Two positions have, been urged in this court as grounds for the reversal of the judgment entered in the court below: (1) That the district court was divested of jurisdiction by the petition for removal; and (2) that the evidence does not sustain the judgment.
1. intoxicatnuisance*?8' constitutionakryof stat-question. The first position is disposed of by the holding of the supreme court of the United States in Mugler v. State of Kansas and State of Kansas v. Ziebold, 8 Sup. Ct. Rep., 273. The holding in those cases is to , the effect that the state, m the exercise of its police power,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wisconsin, Iowa & Nebraska R'y Co. v. SecorSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. Parker Distilling Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1911
- State v. ArlunoSupreme Court of Iowa · 1936