People v. Keefer
Michigan Supreme Court
Exceptions before ¡judgment from Hillsdale. (Lane, J.) Respondent was convicted of a violation of the local option law. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
*17McGrath, J.
Respondent was convicted under the local option law. The jury brought in' a general verdict. The information contains seven counts. The first count alleges that respondent—. “Did then and there run a saloon and bar, and at said saloon and bar did then and there sell and furnish to Frank S. Fellhauer and divers other persons spirituous and intoxicating liquors, * * * and did then and there knowingly keep a saloon, where * * * intoxicating liquors * * * were sold and furnished as a beverage.”
The second, third, and fifth counts allege that respondent “ did then and there sell and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Monaghan v. Agricultural Fire InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- State v. SchweiterSupreme Court of Kansas · 1882
- Boldt v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1888
- People v. AdamsMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
- Tiedke v. City of SaginawMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- People v. CzckayMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
- People v. JenkinsMichigan Court of Appeals · 1968
- People v. LarcoMichigan Supreme Court · 1951
- People v. NicolaidesMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
- Brown v. HadwinMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.