Legal Opinion

Webster v. Lamb

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided February 12, 1902PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from circuit court, Minnehaha county. 'Hon. J. W. Jones, Judge. Action by I. D. Webster against Michael Lamb. From an order overruling a general demurrer to the complaint, defendant appeals. The rule is well settled that the penalty for doing an act, except m a way provided by law, amounts to a prohibition, and a contract which is derived from or is traced through such a service is illegal and void. Aetna Ins.

Read the full summary

1Opinion of the CourtFuller, J.

This is an appeal from an order overruling a general demurrer to the following complaint: “That at all of the times hereinafter mentioned the plaintiff was a duly qualified, licensed, and practicing physician and surgeon. That between the 22nd day of January, 1895, and the 5th day of August, 1897, the plaintiff rendered medical services and other professional services, in his capacity of physician and surgeon, for the defendant’s family, at the defendant’s special instance and request. That said services were reasonably worth one hundred and sixty-three dollars ($163). That said sum of one…

2Cases cited4 opinions

Lacy v. County of KossuthSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
Thompson v. SayreCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
Acme Mercantile Agency v. RochfordSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1897
Lyford v. MartinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900

3Cited by1 opinion

Harris v. BucherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1914