State v. Abraham
| Decision Date | 10 February 1910 |
| Citation | 165 Ala. 201,51 So. 788 |
| Parties | STATE EX REL. GARBER, ATTY. GEN., v. ABRAHAM ET AL. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Chancery Court, Montgomery County; L. D. Gardner Chancellor.
Proceeding by the State, on the relation of A. M. Garber, Attorney General, against J. W. Abraham, in which Greil Bros., a corporation, and B. S. Greil, intervened. From a decree dismissing the bill, the State appeals. Affirmed.
Alexander M. Garber, Atty. Gen., Thomas W. Martin, Asst. Atty. Gen and Phil H. Stern, Sol. (William L. Martin, of counsel), for the State.
Steiner Crum & Weil, and Hill, Hill & Whiting, for appellees.
This is an equity proceeding under "An act to further suppress the evils of intemperance," etc. (commonly called the "Fuller Bill"). Acts Sp. Sess. 1909, p. 63. The bill makes Joe Abraham and his landlords and agents parties and alleges that Abraham occupies the ground floor of the building described as "a saloon," that he holds a United States license as a retail liquor dealer, that none of the parties are wholesale or retail druggists, and that said Abranam "is conducting upon said premises an unlawful drinking place, and is engaged in the business of a retail liquor dealer," and prays for an injunction and writ of seizure, and that the premises be closed, in accordance with the provisions of said act. The bill was subsequently amended, by striking out the prayer for closing the premises. The writs were issued in accordance with the prayer of the bill. Under the writs of seizure certain bar fixtures, soda fount, ice box, tables, chairs, bar glasses, jugs of syrup, cash registers, and nine half pints of whisky were seized.
Greil Bros., a corporation, intervened by petition, alleging that said corporation had delivered to said Abraham the soda fount and outfit under an agreement, which is made an exhibit to said petition, by which said property was to be rented to said Abraham until he paid a certain amount, when the property was to be conveyed to said Abraham, and that only a small part had been paid. Petitioners therefore claimed the property, and prayed that the same be delivered to them on suitable bond, etc. The petition was afterwards amended so as to allege that said property was not used by or with petitioners' consent for any unlawful purpose, etc. B. S Greil also intervened, claiming the other personal property seized, not including the whisky and syrup, alleging that he had rented the same to Abraham, and that it was not used for any unlawful purpose with his consent and knowledge. Numerous demurrers were interposed, and acted on by the court; also motions to disallow the intervention, etc. The chancellor ordered the property to be delivered to the interveners...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Woodward v. State
...in his opinion that the affidavit would be insufficient, but for the recent cases of Fitzpatrick v. State, 53 So. 1021, and State v. Abraham, 165 Ala. 201, 51 So. 788. affidavit in the Fitzpatrick Case is unlike the one in question, and avers that affiant has probable cause for believing an......