Legal Opinion

State v. Fitzpatrick

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided October 29, 1965No. 9718PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TAYLOR, Justice.

This proceeding was commenced pursuant to provisions of I.C. § 18-3804 for the seizure and destruction of a pinball machine owned by the defendant (appellant). The district court, on authority of Thamart v. Moline, 66 Idaho 110, 156 P.2d 187 (1945), held the machine to be a gambling device within the meaning of I.C. § 18-3801, and ordered its destruction. Execution of the order was stayed pending this appeal. The statutory definition of prohibited gambling devices (I.C. § 18-3801) so far as here involved is the same now as quoted in the Thamart case. After naming certain…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Independent School District No. 5 ex rel. Moore v. CollinsIdaho Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Peachey v. Boswell, MayorIndiana Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Gayer v. WhelanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  4. In Re DampierIdaho Supreme Court · 1928
  5. McKee v. FosterOregon Supreme Court · 1959

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. One Cocktail Glass v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1977
  2. WNEK Vending & Amusements Co. v. City of BuffaloNew York Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Bojack's, Inc. v. Department of Law EnforcementIdaho Supreme Court · 1966
  4. One Cocktail Glass v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1977
  5. State v. HahnIdaho Supreme Court · 1968

1 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