Opinion

State v. Brown

  • 31 Me. 522
Court
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Filed
Jul 1, 1850
Status
Published
Author
Howardorally
On the bench
Howard, Orally
Cited by
5 cases
Authority
More cited than 84.7%

The opinion

Howard, J., orally.

We consider the exceptions in the first section of the Act to be sufficiently negatived in the complaint. The provisions of the twenty-fourth section have no application. The name of Mrs. Brown might not have been known to the complainant. A conviction hero would bar another complaint for the same offence.

The liquor was sold for a medical purpose. It might be indiscreet to prosecute, but the defendant had no right to sell, whether for medicine, or for drinking or for any other purpose.

Exceptions overruled.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.