Legal Opinion
City of Burlingame v. Thompson
Supreme Court of Kansas
Decided July 6, 1906No. 14,848PublishedCited by 18 opinions
Appeal from Osage district court; Robert C. Heizer, judge.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Burch, J.:
Appellant was convicted of maintaining and operating pool-tables in the city of Burlingame coiffeiary to an ordinance enacted August 21, 1905, vdtgdh reads as follows:
T “Section 1. It shall be unlawful for any person or persons to operate or maintain any billiard-table, pool-table, pool-room, pool-hall or bowling-alley for pay within the city limits of the city of Burlingame.
“Sec. 2. Any person who shall violate any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall upon conviction thereof be fined not less…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Mugler v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Powell v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- City of Tarkio v. CookSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- State v. DureinSupreme Court of Kansas · 1904
- Stevens v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1840
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Stephan v. LaneSupreme Court of Kansas · 1980
- Moody v. Board of Shawnee County Comm'rsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1985
- Johnson v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1938
- In Re JonesCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1910
- Ex parte RoweAlabama Court of Appeals · 1912
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.