Mayer v. State
53 N.W. 444, 83 Wis. 339, 1892 Wisc. LEXIS 204
Opinion
The conviction must be affirmed. The case is ruled by the decision in Peitz v. State, 68 Wis. 538. The only difference between the two cases is that in the Peitz Case the sale was made direct to the consumer, while here it was made to a dealer. No distinction between the two cases is made by the excise law. The terms of the statute cover both oases equally.
By the Court.— Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Mayer v. State, 53 N.W. 444, 83 Wis. 339, 1892 Wisc. LEXIS 204 (Wis. 1892).
53 N.W. 444 (Mayer v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Duluth Brewing & Malting Co. v. City of Superior
123 F. 353 (Seventh Circuit, 1903)
Michels v. State
90 N.W. 1096 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1902)