Whitney v. Township Board
Michigan Supreme Court
Mandamus. Relators apply for mandamus to compel respondent to approve a liquor bond. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMorse, J.
This case involves the constitutionality of Act No. 31, Laws of 1887, which provides that it shall not be lawful to establish or maintain a saloon or other place of entertainment in which intoxicating liquors are sold, or kept for sale, within one mile of the Soldiers’ Home, and also prohibits the sale or giving of liquor to a soldier, sailor, or marine, who is an inmate or employé of such Home, within the same distance.
The relators, Whitney and Saunders, on September 13, 1884, purchased about three-fourths of an acre of land on the Canal-street gravel road, a few miles 'out from the city of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Thurlow v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1847
- Beer Co. v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Fell v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1875
- O'Leary v. County of CookIllinois Supreme Court · 1862
- Boyd v. BryantSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1879
3Cited by9 opinions
- Fitzpatrick v. Liquor Control CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1946
- City of Grand Rapids v. PowersMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Feek v. Township Board of BloomingdaleMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Fuchs v. Common CouncilMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
- Rapp v. VenableNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1910
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.