From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Klein v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama
Jun 8, 1939
189 So. 771 (Ala. 1939)

Opinion

7 Div. 577.

June 8, 1939.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Calhoun County; R. B. Carr, Judge.

Knox, Acker Sterne, of Anniston, for appellant.

The bare possession of intoxicating liquors does not in itself amount to a nuisance, as defined by Section 4619 of the Code. Harvell v. State, 235 Ala. 329, 179 So. 233. Padlocking, a severe remedy depriving one of the use of his property for lawful purposes, should not be exercised unless it is shown from the conduct of the party that he is a persistent violator of the law, determined to evade the law. Garrett v. State, 235 Ala. 457, 179 So. 636; Brooks v. State, 210 Ala. 97, 97 So. 137; Barnett v. State, 235 Ala. 326, 179 So. 208; Ex parte Harvell, 235 Ala. 63, 177 So. 345.

Thos. S. Lawson, Atty. Gen., for appellee.


Bill to abate a liquor nuisance, filed under the provisions of Sections 4671 et seq., of the Code, by the State of Alabama, on relation of H. H. Evans, Deputy Solicitor of Calhoun County.

The averments of the bill comply in every respect with statutory requirements, and present a case calling into exercise the equity jurisdiction of the Circuit Court of Calhoun County to abate an alleged existing liquor nuisance carried on in said county by the appellant, defendant in the court below. Code, §§ 4619, 4671 and 4672. This bill is properly verified by the deputy solicitor, on whose relation it was filed.

The demurrer addressed to the bill is without merit. Barnett v. State ex rel. Simpson, Solicitor et al., 235 Ala. 326, 179 So. 208; Garrett v. State ex rel. Matthews, 235 Ala. 457, 179 So. 636; Harvell v. State ex rel. Sanford, 235 Ala. 329, 179 So. 233.

The evidence offered upon the trial was given ore tenus, and a review and consideration of the same, as found in the record, convinces us that the charges and averments of the bill were fully sustained, and that the court committed no error in its final decree in said cause.

It follows, therefore, that the decree of the circuit court is due to be affirmed. It is so ordered.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and THOMAS and BROWN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Klein v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama
Jun 8, 1939
189 So. 771 (Ala. 1939)
Case details for

Klein v. State

Case Details

Full title:KLEIN v. STATE ex rel. EVANS, Deputy Solicitor

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Jun 8, 1939

Citations

189 So. 771 (Ala. 1939)
189 So. 771

Citing Cases

West v. State

Hodge v. Joy, 207 Ala. 198, 92 So. 171; Gizler v. State ex rel. Green, ante, p. 80, 189 So. 556. We have…

Thompson v. State

Our attention is called to several cases involving alleged liquor nuisances, where the bills of complaint,…