(Download) "Union Cent. Life Ins. Co. v. Audet Et Al." by Supreme Court of Montana # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Union Cent. Life Ins. Co. v. Audet Et Al.
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 05, 1933
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 67 KB
Description
1. Statutes — Acts construed in "pari materia." The State Liquor Control Act and Montana Beer Act are in pari materia and must be construed together, and they comprise, with amendments thereto, but one homogeneous consistent body of law. 2. Intoxicating Liquors — Liquor Control under police power. The State Liquor Control Act and Montana Beer Act are police regulations enacted pursuant to states police power. 3. Intoxicating Liquors — Under phrase "mala prohibita" and "mala in se." Page 317 The acts condemned and prohibited in State Liquor Control Act and Montana Beer Act are mala prohibita, as distinguished from acts mala in se. 4. Criminal Law — Specific intent. In determining accuseds guilt, intent governs as to acts mala in se, but as to acts mala prohibita, only inquiry is whether law has been violated. 5. Intoxicating Liquors — Responsibility of owner in sale by bar maid. A tavern owner may be held criminally liable for violations of State Liquor Control Act and Montana Beer Act by bar maid on tavern premises, as in selling beer to minor, even if such maid was working for tavern manager employed by owner and was not on owners payroll. 6. Intoxicating Liquors — Agency — Effect of bar maid not being on payroll. The fact that bar maid, unlawfully selling beer to minor in tavern, was not on tavern owners payroll is immaterial on question of her agency for owner in making sale, as agency is founded on consent, not consideration. 7. Intoxicating Liquors — Agency — Scope of authority. A licensed tavern owners agent or servant, having no license to sell beer to any one, may lawfully do so only in name and by authority of principal and is conclusively presumed to have acted within scope of his authority in selling beer to minor in violation of statute. 8. Criminal Law — Effect of Presumption. The trial court must find according to a presumption, in absence of evidence legally sufficient to overcome it. 9. Criminal Law — Liability of principal for criminal acts of agent. Generally, a person is not liable for anothers criminal acts, in which such person did not participate either directly or indirectly, but a principal may be convicted for agents maintenance of public nuisance or violation of revenue and police regulations without proof that principal authorized agents commission of crime and even in face of proof that principal forbade commission thereof. 10. Intoxicating Liquors — Saloon owner criminally liable for acts of agents. A saloon owner is criminally liable for his agents violations of intoxicating liquor laws, though without his knowledge or even against his express prohibition. 11. Intoxicating Liquors — Evidence supports verdict. Evidence was sufficient to support jurys verdict of conviction for selling and permitting sale of beer to a minor by and through a bar maid in defendants tavern.
 "Union Cent. Life Ins. Co. v. Audet Et Al." by Supreme Court of Montana # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free){kind=link}