History
  • No items yet
midpage
Gabriel Building Co. v. State Ex Rel. Birrell
186 N.E. 5
Ohio
1932
Check Treatment

The sole question for determination in this case is whether Section 13195-1, General Code, known as the “Padlock Act,” is constitutional. The Ohio statute above referred to is so nearly identical with the national prohibition law on the same subject that we are constrained to follow the decisions of the United States Supreme Court which have declared the national law to be constitutional. Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U. S., 623; Lewisohn v. United States, 258 U. S., 630; Grossfield v. United States, 276 U. S., 494.

The petition in error will therefore be dismissed.

Petition in error dismissed.

Marshall, C. J., Jones, Matthias, Day, Allen, Kinkade and Stephenson, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Gabriel Building Co. v. State Ex Rel. Birrell
Court Name: Ohio Supreme Court
Date Published: Jun 15, 1932
Citation: 186 N.E. 5
Docket Number: 23590
Court Abbreviation: Ohio
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.