Legal Opinion
People v. Gault
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided April 2, 1895PublishedCited by 16 opinions
Exceptions before judgment from Montcalm. (Davis, J.) Despondent was convicted of unlawfully engaging in the liquor business. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
The respondent is charged with having, on the 1st day of May, 1893, been engaged in the business of selling and offering for sale malt, brewed, and fermented liquors, without having paid the annual tax required by law, and without having the receipt and notice for said tax posted up. The information alleges that—
“ Said James Gault, not being then and there a druggist who sells or then sold liquors for chemical, scientific, medicinal, mechanical, or sacramental purposes only, was then and there engaged,” etc.
The statute exempts from the penal provisions of the act druggists who sell liquors…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State v. AndrewsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858
- State v. BlahutSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- Luton v. Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- People v. HaasMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- State v. ShaferSupreme Court of Kansas · 1878
3Cited by16 opinions
- People v. NuttMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
- Watson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1907
- Pueblo v. PérezSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1934
- Foran v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1924
- Territory of Oklahoma Ex Rel. City of Oklahoma v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1907
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.