Legal Opinion

Martin v. Blattner

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided March 17, 1886PublishedCited by 27 opinions

The plaintiff brought this suit in chancery under Code,.§ 1543, as amended by chapter 143 of the Acts of the Twentieth General Assembly, to restrain the defendants and another from maintaining a nuisance by keeping a place for the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors. A 'preliminary injunction was allowed. Defendants, C. Blattner and Gibbs, appeal.

1Opinion of the CourtBeck, J.

I. The original petition contains sufficient averments, charging that Charles and Ered Blattner maintained a nuisance by keeping a place for the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors. Ered, by his answer, not under oath, denies the allegations. Charles, in a verified answer, makes a like denial, and pleads that the statute under which the proceeding is instituted is unconstitutional, and that the action is barred by reason of the fact that he was adjudged not guilty in two separate criminal proceedings wherein he was charged with violating the statute prohibiting the sale of intoxicating…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Corporation of Brick Presbyterian Church v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1826
  2. People v. HawleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1854
  3. Reynolds v. GearySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1857

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. State v. Hutchinson Ice Cream Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1914
  2. Beresheim v. ArndSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
  3. State Ex Rel. Bailes v. Guardian Realty Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1939
  4. Flannagan v. JepsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
  5. State ex rel. English v. FanningNebraska Supreme Court · 1914

22 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