In re Barber

3 Liquor Tax Rep. 530

Opinion

The petition is not made on information and belief, except the paragraph charging the sales of liquor, and this paragraph refers to the affidavits annexed and which are made a part of the petition, in which the sales are sworn to positively, and this has been approved in Matter of Cullinan v. Micha (76 App. Div. 362; affirmed, 173 N. Y. 610; Matter of Wheaton v. Slattery, 96 App. Div. 102.)

In Matter of Hunter, 34 Misc. 389, affirmed, 59 App. Div. 626, the petition did not show that the beer ” sold was fermented or malt liquor, hence no violation was charged, and the sale was made three months before the proceedings were begun. This was too remote.

The injunction does not deprive the defendant of any legal right, nor prevent him from doing anything which he has a legal right to do. He is enjoined only from the commission of a crime.

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

In re Barber, 3 Liquor Tax Rep. 530 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1905).

3 Liquor Tax Rep. 530 (In re Barber) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Cullinan
76 A.D. 362 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1902)
Wheaton v. Slattery
96 A.D. 102 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1904)
In re Hunter
34 Misc. 389 (New York Supreme Court, 1901)