Legal Opinion
State Ex Rel. Manchester v. Marvin
Supreme Court of Iowa
Decided December 9, 1930No. 40225PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEvans, J.
-The operation of the machine is described in appellant’s brief as follows:
“The machine in question is operated as a mint-vending machine, and upon the deposit of a nickel, uniformly releases one package of mints. If the compartment is empty, the slot receiving the money automatically returns same to the depositor. These facts are conceded in this case, and the only proposition upon which it is claimed this machine is a gambling device is that it occasionally releases certain brass discs or tokens, which are stamped on one side, ‘good for amusement only,’ and on the other side, ‘no cash…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- City of Moberly v. DeskinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913
- Harvie v. Heise, SheriffSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1929
3Cited by25 opinions
- Kraus v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1939
- People v. One Pinball Machine Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1942
- State v. RandSupreme Court of Iowa · 1947
- Painter v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1932
- State v. CowenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1942
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.