Hines v. Stahl

Citations

• 79 Kan. 88
• 99 P. 273

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Intoxicating Liquor—Execution Sale. Intoxicating liquor, is not subject to seizure on execution, because the statute forbids its sale except by certain persons, for restricted purposes, and upon affidavit of the buyer showing the occasion for his purchase.</p> <p>2. Replevin—Intoxicating Liquor—Failure to Prosecute—Right of Possession—Presumption—Official Conduct. ' Where replevin was brought for intoxicating liquor, and after obtaining possession thereof the plaintiff dismissed his action, evidence that at the commencement of the litigation the defendant held the property as city marshal under a warrant issued by the police court justifies a-presumption, in the absence of anything to suggest the contrary, that he was acting under an ordinance passed in aid of the prohibitory law authorizing the seizure and destruction of liquor kept for sale in violation of the statute.</p> <p>3. -Judgment—Value of the Property. In such a case, if the defendant is found to be entitled to a return of the property, he is also entitled to a judgment for its full value in case a return can not be had.</p> <p>4. -Expiration of Defendant’s Term of Office—Effect on Recovery. In such a case a recovery by the defendant is not defeated by the fact that his term of office has expired.</p>