State v. Shields
Citations
- 110 La. 547
- 34 So. 673
- 1903 La. LEXIS 669
Syllabus
<p>INTOXICATING LIQUORS — SALE AT RETAIL— WHAT CONSTITUTES — QUESTION EOR COURT.</p> <p>--1. This case has been tried upon an admission and agreement to the following effect, to wit: That the defendant S., acting in the parish of Winn as the agent of W., who is established as a liquor dealer in the parish of Ouachita, solicited and received an order for a certain kind and quantity of whisky, less than five gallons, at an agreed price, which order he sent to W. to be filled; that W., or his agents, filled the order by taking whisky, of the kind and in the quantity called for, from his general stock, in the parish of Ouachita, and delivering it to a public carrier, consigned to the person by whom the order was given, who received it in the parish of Winn, paid the freight, and some time later, when called on, paid the price to S., still acting as the agent of W. It is left to the court to decide whether or not, as a proposition of law, the facts thus submitted constitute the crime of retailing spirituous liquors in the parish of Winn, . or whether the parish of Ouachita- is to be considered, under the law, as the place of the sale.</p> <p>2. What the defendant S., as the .agent of W., was authorized to do, is a question of fact, upon which the finding of the trial court is conclusive, since in criminal cases the jurisdiction of this court is confined to questions of law. And what the defendant did. is also a question of fact. But whether that which he did amounted to the selling of liquor in the-parish of Winn, as the case is presented, and in the absence of proof or finding as to the intention of the parties, is a question of law, since it is the law which determines what constitutes a contract, by what rules such contract is to be interpreted, and what name shall be</p> <p>given to it.</p> <p>3. In receiving the order for a certain quantity of whisky, of a kind and at a price agreed on, to be supplied from a general stock, but without identification of the particula
Judges: Breaux, Decree, Monroe
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
17 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Modern Farm Service, Inc. v. Ben Pearson, Inc.Fifth Circuit· 1962-09-18· cited 18×
- George D. Witt Shoe Co. v. J. A. Seegars & Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana· 1908-10-19· cited 18×
- Collector of Revenue v. JL Richardson CompanyLouisiana Court of Appeal· 1971-06-07· cited 17×
- Succession of WelshSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1904-02-01· cited 16×
- Consolidated Companies, Inc. v. LawsLouisiana Court of Appeal· 1929-12-03· cited 13×
- Plaquemines Equipment & MacHine Co. v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana· 1963-11-12· cited 11×
- Mitsubishi International Corporation v. Clark Pipe And Supply Company, Inc.Fifth Circuit· 1984-06-28· cited 10×
- American Slicing Machine Co. v. Rothschild & LyonsLouisiana Court of Appeal· 1929-12-31· cited 10×
- City of Lake Charles v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc.Supreme Court of Louisiana· 1905-05-08· cited 9×
- Fabacher v. United StatesFifth Circuit· 1936-07-14· cited 8×
- Mitsubishi International Corp. v. Clark Pipe & Supply Co.Fifth Circuit· 1984-06-28· cited 7×
- Clyde Iron Works v. FrerichsFifth Circuit· 1913-03-11· cited 3×
- In re Wallace Lincoln-Mercury, Inc.W.D. Louisiana· 1971-05-14· cited 2×
- Fox v. United StatesFourth Circuit· 1929-07-15· cited 1×
- Page & Hill Co. v. Shreveport-Eldorado Pipe Line Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal· 1926-06-30
- Singer Co. v. WillisW.D. Louisiana· 1977-08-26
- Cole v. Circle R. Convenience Stores, Inc.M.D. Louisiana· 1985-08-30
Cites
7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Erman v. LehmanSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1895-12-02· cited 9×
- State v. McAdamsSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1901-11-15· cited 8×
- Smith's Heirs v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1902-05-12· cited 6×
- Larue v. RugelySupreme Court of Louisiana· 1855-04-15· cited 2×
- Duncan v. George Arnold Holt & Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana· 1869-03-15· cited 2×
- Warren v. KirkSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1872-03-15· cited 1×
- A. A. Paton & Co. v. NewmanSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1899-06-12· cited 1×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.