Case Name: The State of Texas v. G. W. Jordan et al.
Court: Texas Courts of Civil Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1900-03-17
Citations: 23 Tex. Civ. App. 136
Docket Number: 
Parties: The State of Texas v. G. W. Jordan et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Civil Appeals Reports
Volume: 23
Pages: 136–137

Head Matter:
The State of Texas v. G. W. Jordan et al.
Decided March 17, 1900.
Minor Emancipation—Liquor Dealer’s Bond.
A minor over 19 years old, emancipated by his parents and doing business for himself, went into the retail liquor business with his brother as partner, the firm taking out a license from the State and giving the bond required by the statute, conditioned to permit no minors to enter and remain on the premises where thé liquors were sold. Held, that it was no infraction of the bond for such minor owner to remain on the premises and there conduct his business.
Appeal from Bosque. Tried below before Hon. J. M. Hall.
H. S. Dillard, County Attorney, and N. J. Wade, for the State.

Opinion:
HUNTER, Associate Justice.
This suit was brought in the District Court of Bosque County by the county attorney in the name of the State of Texas against G-. W. Jordan and J. T. Jordan and their sureties to recover the penalty of $500 for a breach of their saloonkeeper's bond, in allowing J. T. Jordan, a minor under the age of 21 years, to , enter and remain in the saloon where the liquors were being sold and to wait upon customers as bartender.
The defendants admitted that J. T. Jordan was a minor, but alleged that he had been emancipated by his parents—he being over 19 years old—and was a partner in the business, and joined in the application for license, and that the license was issued to him and G. W. Jordan, and that he was a part owner of the business.
The evidence sustained these allegations. The court gave judgment for defendants, and the State has appealed.
We think the judgment is correct.* The young man having been emancipated by his parents and allowed to do business for himself, and having, as a partner of his brother, G. W. Jordan, applied for and received the State's license to carry on a saloon and sell liquors at that place, he had the right to be and remain there and sell his liquors. The stipulations of the bond were not intended to exclude the owners of the saloon from the premises, but gave them the right to enter, remain there, and carry on their business.
The judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.