Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Wall

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided July 1, 1936PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtQua, J.

The defendant, manager of a moving picture theatre in Medford, was convicted of being concerned in setting up a lottery for money on December 18, 1935, in violation of G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 271, § 7. None of the other cognate offences described in that section was charged. The principal question is whether the jury were warranted in finding that the plan or scheme for increasing patronage known as “Bank Night,” as operated by the defendant, was a lottery.

Under this plan the theatre would deposit each week the sum of $35 in a bank. Registration books were kept by the theatre wherein were…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Hull v. . RugglesNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
  2. Glover v. MalloskaMichigan Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Yellow-Stone Kit v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1889
  4. State v. DanzWashington Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Maughs v. PorterSupreme Court of Virginia · 1931

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. Herald Publishing Co. v. BillSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1955
  2. Mobil Oil Corp. v. Attorney GeneralMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1972
  3. Commonwealth v. RiesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1958
  4. State ex rel. Beck v. Fox Kansas Theatre Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1936
  5. Affiliated Enterprises, Inc. v. WallerSuperior Court of Delaware · 1939

37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API