Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Hinkle v. . Scott

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 9, 1937PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partConnor, J.

Action to restrain the sheriff of Forsyth County and the chief of police of Kernersville from interfering with plaintiffs' operation of certain slot machines. From judgment dissolving the temporary restraining order, plaintiffs appealed. It is alleged in the third and fourth paragraphs of the complaint that each of the plaintiffs has paid State and county license "for the privilege of operating certain coin operated devices known as predictable slot machines in that the operator thereof can ascertain in advance of each and every play, and before said play is made, the exact result thereof,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. . HumphriesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  2. Dunn v. . WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  3. Angelo v. City of Winston-SalemSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. McCormick v. . ProctorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  2. Calcutt v. . McGeachySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  3. Alexander v. Martin, SheriffSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1939
  4. State v. . AbbottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  5. State Ex Rel. Replogle v. Joyland ClubMontana Supreme Court · 1950

10 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