People v. Hamilton
Michigan Supreme Court
Exceptions before judgment from Yan Burén. (Buck, J.) Respondent, a druggist, was convicted of selling liquor to a person in the habit of getting intoxicated. . The facts are •stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMcGrath, C. J.
The information charges that on the 1st day of March, 1893, and on divers days and times between that day and the 7th day of May, 1893, respondent did sell and furnish to one Bryant certain quantities of spirituous liquors, aggregating in amount, between said dates, three gallons and three quarts of whisky, the said Bryant being then and there a person in the habit of getting-intoxicated, and respondent being then and there a druggist and registered pharmacist.
It is contended that the information does not allege that the' liquor was sold to be used as a beverage. The statute prohibits a sale…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. PischelNebraska Supreme Court · 1884
- State v. TempleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1865
3Cited by4 opinions
- People v. CzckayMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
- State v. DennisonNebraska Supreme Court · 1900
- Wood v. LentzMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
- People v. AllanMichigan Supreme Court · 1933