Haddox v. County of Clarke

Citations

• 79 Va. 677
• 1884 Va. LEXIS 130

Syllabus

<p>x. Liquor Licenses—Application—Hearing de novo.—Where, under Acts 1879-80, page 148, application for liquor license is refused by county court, and during the same term the applicant appeals to circuit judge or court (not upon bill of exceptions to rulings of county court), the appeal is but a transfer of the application to another tribunal, where it is heard de novo. Leighton v. Maury, 76 Va. 869; Ex parte Lester, 77 Va. 663.</p> <p>2. Statutes—Construction—Local Elections.—Where, as under Acts 1879-80, p. 271, a question is submitted to the qualified voters of a county and of each magisterial district, and it is made the duty of the sheriff of the county to post notices of the election at every voting place in the county within a prescribed period preceding the election, the failure so to post said notices invalidates the election.</p> <p>3. Practice at Common Law—Parol Evidence.—On application for liquor license in a county where such an election has taken place, either in the first case before the county court, or in the second case before the circuit court or judge in vacation, parol evidence is admissible to prove that notices of the election had not been posted, or that any other plain and express provision of the statute, providing for the election, had not been complied with. Chalmers v. Funk, 76 Va. 717.</p>