{
  "id": 1875638,
  "name": "Blahut vs. The State",
  "name_abbreviation": "Blahut v. State",
  "decision_date": "1879-11",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "447",
  "last_page": "448",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "34 Ark. 447"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 110,
    "char_count": 1283,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.429,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.27879270835649e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6167019776056442
    },
    "sha256": "603940c87a9b2bf0f50f847d7dbc97048d558d59821bb77c5f9f12f0f8e393e0",
    "simhash": "1:3649333dc5aec9ca",
    "word_count": 215
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:09:16.201435+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Blahut vs. The State."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Eakin, J.\nAppellant, William Blahut, was indicted, together with J. Blahut, for Sabbath-breaking by keeping open a dram-shop on Sunday. They severed. William Blahut was tried by a jury, convicted, fined, denied a new trial, and then appealed, on the ground that the evidence did not support the verdict.\nIt tended to show that appellant was a nominal partner in a saloon, and one of the bar-tenders. For a year before the indictment it had been the habit to close the front door of the saloon on Sunday, and leave unfastened a back door, through which persons might, and did, come to buy drinks. Appellant and another bar-tender attended by turns on Sunday to furnish the liquor.\nThis, if true, constituted the offense of keeping open a dram-shop. The jury were proper judges of the weight of the evidence.\nAffirm.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Eakin, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Henderson, Attorney General, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Blahut vs. The State.\n1. Sabbath-Breaking : Keeping open saloon on Sunday.\nAppellant was a nominal partner in a saloon, and he and another bar-tender attended by turns on Sundays to furnish liquor to customers entering at the back door; the front door being kept closed. Held guilty of the offense of Sabbath-breaking by keeping open a dram-shop on Sunday.\nAPPEAL from Garland Circuit Court.\nHon. J. M. Smith, Circuit Judge.\nHenderson, Attorney General, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0447-01",
  "first_page_order": 449,
  "last_page_order": 450
}