State v. Southern Express Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. Southern Express Co.

83 S.E. 751, 168 N.C. 207, 1914 N.C. LEXIS 37

DecidedDecember 16, 1914

StatusPublished

This text of 83 S.E. 751 (State v. Southern Express Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Southern Express Co., 83 S.E. 751, 168 N.C. 207, 1914 N.C. LEXIS 37 (N.C. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Tbe verdict in part states that tbe liquor was ordered and shipped from tbe city of Roanoke in tbe State of Virginia, and “That tbe said spirituous liquors were ordered by tbe said John W. Garrison of tbe said dealer at Roanoke for tbe personal private use of tbe said John W. Garrison, and were not intended for sale or other unlawful use, and were not in fact sold, but were used and consumed by tbe said Garrison himself.”

Tbe statute under which tbe defendant is indicted is substantially tbe same ás tbe one construed in Express Co. v. High Point, 167 N. C., 103. In bis brief tbe learned Attorney-General admits that on tbe authority of that case and under tbe construction placed upon that, a similar statute, tbe -judgment of tbe Superior Court was correct.

Affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

Tbe verdict in part states that tbe liquor was ordered and shipped from tbe city of Roanoke in tbe State of Virginia, and “That tbe said spirituous liquors were ordered by tbe said John W. Garrison of tbe said dealer at Roanoke for tbe personal private use of tbe said John W. Garrison, and were not intended for sale or other unlawful use, and were not in fact sold, but were used and consumed by tbe said Garrison himself.”

Tbe statute under which tbe defendant is indicted is substantially tbe same ás tbe one construed in Express Co. v. High Point, 167 N. C., 103. In bis brief tbe learned Attorney-General admits that on tbe authority of that case and under tbe construction placed upon that, a similar statute, tbe -judgment of tbe Superior Court was correct.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 S.E. 751, 168 N.C. 207, 1914 N.C. LEXIS 37, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-southern-express-co-nc-1914.