Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

71 Mass. 101

Commonwealth v. Packard

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided October 15, 1855

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1855-10-15

Indictment on St. 1852, c. 322, containing four counts, the first on § 12 for being a common seller of intoxicating liquors at New Bedford on the 1st of August 1852, and from that day to the 1st of January 1853 ; and the other three on § 7, for single unlawful sales of intoxicating liquors at the same place on subsequent days.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 1906

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1855-10-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

By the Court.

¶11. It is not necessary to decide whether the first count could have stood with the others; for having been negatived by the jury, it is as if it had never been inserted in the indictment. Kightly v. Birch, 2 M. & S. 533.

¶22. A sale of intoxicating liquors is a delivery, upon compensation made, or stipulated to be made. There must be an agreement to pay, to make it a sale ; otherwise, it is a mere gratuity. Here it was left doubtful upon the evidence, until the witness testified that the defendant declined to take any pay. There was then no evidence which ought to be left to the jury. The exceptions must therefore be sustained as to the third count.

¶3The attorney general then, with the leave of the court, entered a nolle prosequi upon this count, and the court overruled the exceptions as to the other counts.

/71/mass/101 · .json · Public domain