Garrett v. Bishop
Supreme Court of Iowa
This is a certiorari proceeding brought to test the legality of an order discharging one George Conradi, and adjudging him not guilty of contempt in violating an injunction.
1Opinion of the CourtWaterman, J.
*241 *23The facts are all stipulated. It appears that Conradi had been enjoined from selling, or keep*24ing for sale, any intoxicating liquors within the Ninth-judicial district. He again engaged in business, claiming the protection of the mulct law. Information was filed by plaintiff, charging him with contempt in violating the injunction. It is conceded that Conradi is protected by the provisions of the mulct law (chapter 62, Acts Twenty-fifth General Assembly), unless because of the following facts, which appear in the stipulation; and the question submitted is, do these facts deprive him of legal…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. BussamusSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899
- West v. BishopSupreme Court of Iowa · 1900
- Powers v. KlattSupreme Court of Iowa · 1900
3Cited by5 opinions
- Jones v. MouldSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
- Wells v. District Court of Polk CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
- State v. DonahueSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Bell v. HammSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904
- Sawyer v. OliverSupreme Court of Iowa · 1909