United States v. Cano Et Ux.

135 A. 1, 100 Vt. 111, 1926 Vt. LEXIS 130
Supreme Court of Vermont·Decided November 15, 1926·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinions

The record sent up to the Supreme Court states that this action is a bill in equity, brought by the State's attorney of Washington County, in the name of the United States of America, pursuant to Title 2 of the Act of Congress, dated October 28, 1919, known as the "National Prohibition Act," against Manuel Cano and his wife, Julia Cano, both of the city of Barre; that the case was heard before the chancellor (named) upon the bill, answer, and demurrer which was incorporated in the answer; that to the overruling of *Page 112 demurrer, and the entering of a decree according to the bill, defendants excepted; that the time for filing exceptions was extended thirty days; that the exceptions were allowed, decree and injunction stayed, and cause passed to the Supreme Court. This bill of exceptions was dated the 11th day of August, 1926, and signed by the chancellor as such. The decretal order, a copy of which is attached to the bill of exceptions, was dated July 27, 1926, and signed by the chancellor.

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

United States v. Cano Et Ux., 135 A. 1, 100 Vt. 111, 1926 Vt. LEXIS 130 (Vt. 1926).

135 A. 1 (United States v. Cano Et Ux.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

City of Newport v. Linsdsay
170 A. 676 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1933)
Island Pond National Bank v. Lacroix
158 A. 684 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1932)
Duprey v. Harrington
153 A. 355 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1931)
Fire District No. 1 v. Graniteville Spring Water Co.
150 A. 459 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1930)
Residents of Royalton v. Central Vermont Railway Co.
138 A. 781 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1927)