Clement v. Four Barrels of Beer

66 Misc. 1, 122 N.Y.S. 441
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 15, 1910
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 66 Misc. 1 (Clement v. Four Barrels of Beer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Clement v. Four Barrels of Beer, 66 Misc. 1, 122 N.Y.S. 441 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1910).

Opinion

Rogers, J.

After a careful study of the elaborate and learned briefs of the respective counsel, and the authorities therein cited and bearing in mind the rules,

. (a) That every presumption is to be indulged in favor of a statute, and

(b) That a trial court should hesitate to pronounce a statute unconstitutional, 1 have, for the purpose of this trial, concluded:

[2]*2(1) That section 33 of the Liquor Tax Law (Laws 1909, chap. 39) makes provision for due trial’of the right to seize liquors, and that seizure and confiscation,'as and pursuant to the provisions therein prescribed, are takings by “ due process of law.”

(2) That said statute is a legitimate exercise by the Legislature of the police power inherent in a- sovereign State.

(3) That the statute is not in contravention of the provisions of the Constitution, and

(4) That the plaintiff is entitled to judgment according to the prayer of the complaint.

Judgment for plaintiff.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Blanchard
105 Misc. 401 (New York Supreme Court, 1918)
Farley v. Liquors Seized in Car
80 Misc. 32 (New York County Courts, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 Misc. 1, 122 N.Y.S. 441, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clement-v-four-barrels-of-beer-nysupct-1910.