Legal Opinion

People v. Salem

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 19, 1923No. Docket No. 114PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBird, J.

The defendant was informed against and convicted of a violation of Act No. 389, Pub. Acts 1919 (Comp. Laws Supp. 1922, § 15500 [1, 2]), otherwise known as the “pandering statute.” It appeared that the defendant was night clerk of a small hotel situate near the Grand Trunk railway station^ in the city of Detroit. He was a brother of the proprietor. One Sadie Stratton testified, in substance, that she and a girl companion rented a room at the hotel for $7 per week, and that subsequently she made an arrangement with defendant whereby she was permitted to entertain male companions in her room. It…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. McDuff v. Detroit Evening Journal Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1890
  2. People v. KilroeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. People v. MooreMichigan Supreme Court · 1943
  2. People v. YoungMichigan Supreme Court · 1961
  3. People v. FeddersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1950
  4. People v. RayMichigan Court of Appeals · 1966
  5. People v. LaneMichigan Court of Appeals · 1983

2 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