¶2I agree "with, the opinion in so far as it determines that, under the condition of the record, all questions of the creation or maintenance of a nuisance by the defendants permitting noisy or disorderly crowds to assemble on their premises are eliminated; but I am-of the opinion that the answers as -drawn admit the continuous illegal sale of intoxicants by the defendants on Sunday, in open violation of the law, and that they kept their houses open for that purpose, and that persons resorted to the places of business of -the defendants for the purpose of buying liquor on continuous- Sundays, immediately preceding the filing of the suits, and they did - buy it, which, according to my opinion, constitutes a public nuisance, to abate which the-remedy sought in these cases is applicable. For this reason I dissent from the opinion.
173 Ky. 771
Commonwealth v. Ruh
Decided February 9, 1917
Court of Appeals of Kentucky · decided 1917-02-09
<p>Intoxicating Liquors — Illegal Sale — Nuisance—Injunction.—In the absence of a statute conferring such power, courts of equity will not, at the instance of the Commonwealth, enjoin the use of a building for the mere sale of intoxicating liquors on Sunday.</p>
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1917-02-09
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 1981
8 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →