State v. Gurney

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

State v. Gurney

33 Me. 527

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Gurney. Read the opinion of the Court — 37 Me. 156 →

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 1, 1852·Published

Opinion

Howard, J.

— There is no averment in the complaint that the spirituous and intoxicating liquors, in question, were intended for sale in the town where they were kept and deposited. The want of such averment has been held' to be fatal. State v. spirituous and intoxicating liquors, claimed by Robinson. The doctrines of that case, so far as applicable to this, are decisive. See 33 Maine, on a subsequent page.

Exceptions sustained, proceedings quashed, and judgment for restoration of the liquors.

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

Howard, J.

— There is no averment in the complaint that the spirituous and intoxicating liquors, in question, were intended for sale in the town where they were kept and deposited. The want of such averment has been held' to be fatal. State v. spirituous and intoxicating liquors, claimed by Robinson. The doctrines of that case, so far as applicable to this, are decisive. See 33 Maine, on a subsequent page.

Exceptions sustained, proceedings quashed, and judgment for restoration of the liquors.

State v. Gurney, 33 Me. 527 (Me. 1852).

Pincite

33 Me. 527 (State v. Gurney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.