Thamart v. Moline
Idaho Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtAilshie, C. J.
This is an action for injunction against defendants (respondents herein), to enjoin and restrain them from seizing or taking possession of certain alleged “amusement machines” owned by plaintiff (appellant). Since December 20, 1941, the machines have been located in several drive-inns and confectionery stores in Nampa, “to be operated for the enjoyment and use of the public”, being “designed for use in playing- a game known as ‘Marbles’”. Plaintiff alleges: ■
“The game is played by placing a nickel in a money slot which releases five metal marbles which can be shot onto the top of the playing…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- J. B. Mullen & Co. v. MoseleyIdaho Supreme Court · 1907
- Gaither v. CateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1929
- Painter v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1932
- Alexander v. Martin, SheriffSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1939
- State Ex Rel. Manchester v. MarvinSupreme Court of Iowa · 1930
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- State v. Village of Garden CityIdaho Supreme Court · 1953
- State v. One Hundred & Fifty-Eight Gaming DevicesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985
- Commonwealth v. RiversMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1948
- McNeice v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
- State v. Bally Beach Club Pinball MacHineSupreme Court of Vermont · 1956
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.