Legal Opinion

People v. Rose

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 5, 1922No. Docket No. 130PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Exceptions before judgment from Wexford; Lamb (Fred S.), J. Arthur L. Rose was convicted of engaging as a chiropractor without filing a certificate of registration.

1Opinion of the CourtSteere, J.

Defendant was tried and convicted in Wexford county circuit court of violating the provisions of Act No. 237, Pub. Acts 1899, as amended and supplemented by later legislation, by engaging as a chiropractor in treating human ailments and diseases, at the city of Cadillac in said county, on July 1, 1920, and at divers times between that day and February 20, 1921, without having filed a certificate of registration, or copy thereof, with the clerk of the county in which he resided, as the act requires. When arraigned the defendant stood mute and a plea of not guilty was entered by order of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. NeumannMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
  2. People v. WarrenMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Locke v. Ionia Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
  4. People v. ElmerMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  5. People v. KenyonMichigan Supreme Court · 1918

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. HeikkalaMichigan Supreme Court · 1924
  2. People v. LewisMichigan Supreme Court · 1925
  3. People v. WhiteMichigan Court of Appeals · 1973
  4. People v. WhiteMichigan Court of Appeals · 1973

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

Powered by the Exa API