Legal Opinion
City of Muskegon v. Zeeryp
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided July 14, 1903No. Docket No. 11PublishedCited by 14 opinions
Exceptions before judgment from Muskegon; Russell, J. James Zeeryp was convicted of peddling without a license.
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.
The respondent was convicted of violating an ordinance of the city of Muskegon. He has brought the case here on exceptions before sentence.
The agreed facts are as follows:
*182“Defendant, James Zeeryp, is a resident of the city of' Muskegon, and for the past nine years has been a local agent of the Grand Union Tea Company, a New Jersey corporation, whose headquarters are at Brooklyn, N. Y. When defendant first started in business, he was furnished with a sample case, and went from door to door in said city of Muskegon, soliciting orders for teas, coffees, spices, baking powders, and flavoring…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- City of Grand Rapids v. BraudyMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- People v. SawyerMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- People v. BakerMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
- People v. BunkerMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
- Saulsbury v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1901
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- People v. BrazeeMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
- City of Newport v. French Bros. Bauer Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916
- People v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1907
- City of Alma v. ClowMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
- Despres, Bridges & Noel v. ZierleynMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.