Troy Amusement Co. v. Attenweiler
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.
The demurrer raises the question of the right of plaintiff to an injunction to restrain criminal prosecutions for conducting “hank night” in its theater. The plaintiff maintains it is entitled to injunctive relief on the facts alleged in the petition for two reasons: (1) “Bank night” as carried on prior to the commencement of its injunction suit is lawful and not a lottery or scheme of chance within the meaning of Sections 13063 and 13064, General Code, which make the selling of tickets in, and the promoting of, schemes of chance punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both; and (2) the acts…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Olds v. KlotzOhio Supreme Court · 1936
- Harvie v. Heise, SheriffSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1929
- City of Douglas v. South Georgia Grocery Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1934
- Barkley v. ConklinCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
- Sullivan v. San Francisco Gas Etc. Co.California Supreme Court · 1905
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Garono v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- Pharmacia Hepar, Inc. v. City of FranklinOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
- Instant Win v. Summit County Sheriff, Unpublished Decision (4-10-2002)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2002
- Kroger Co. v. CookOhio Court of Appeals · 1968
- Morton v. KeysOhio Court of Appeals · 1961
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.