Legal Opinion
Buchholz v. Commonwealth
Supreme Court of Virginia
Decided March 30, 1920PublishedCited by 7 opinions
Error to a judgment of the Hustings Court of city of Richmond, on information by the Commonwealth to enforce the forfeiture of an automobile. Judgment of forfeiture. The owner of automobile assigns error.
1Opinion of the CourtBhbks, J.
This is an information to enforce a forfeiture of an automobile seized under the provisions of section 57 of .the prohibition act (Acts 1918, p. 612), while engaged in the illegal transportation of ardent spirits. There was a judgment establishing the forfeiture, and to that judgment the writ of error in this case was awarded.
By consent of parties the case was heard by the court, without the intervention of a jury, on the following agreed state of facts:
“It is agreed that the car in question, to-wit, Cadillac 7-passenger, D. C. license 10139-1918, Md. license 1918-H, engine No. 55-A-136,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. One Saxon AutomobileCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1919
- Landers v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1919
- Pennington v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1920
3Cited by7 opinions
- Metro Taxicabs, Inc. v. Tesorero de Puerto RicoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1952
- Mason v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1923
- Edmonson v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1925
- Spratt v. GraySupreme Court of Florida · 1921
- State v. Nash RunaboutSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1929
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.