Legal Opinion

Myers v. City of Cincinnati

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 11, 1934No. 24550PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

It is contended by plaintiff in error that the ordinance in question is invalid because it violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and Article I, Section 19 of the Constitution of Ohio.

Many recent decisions are to the effect that slot vending machines of the general type involved in this case, which in return for coins deposited therein dispense merchandise, accompanied at intervals by a varying number of checks or tokens which may be used either for obtaining additional merchandise or for securing additional amusement by continuing the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Murphy v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  2. City of Burlingame v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1906
  3. City of Shreveport v. DaleSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1921

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Kraus v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Alexander v. Martin, SheriffSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1939
  3. C.D.S., Inc. v. Village of Gates MillsOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Troy Amusement Co. v. AttenweilerOhio Court of Appeals · 1940
  5. State v. BettiUnited States District Court · 1943

3 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