Legal Opinion

Henry v. Kuney

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 21, 1937No. Docket No. 126, Calendar No. 39,424PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSharpe, J.

In January of 1935 the present plaintiffs began a friendly suit against the present defendants to determine the validity of certain games of amusement and skill. A hearing was had on January 10, 1935, at which time the trial judge defined a gaming or gambling machine as, “Any machine, device or apparatus, by the operation or use of which the customer, purchaser or player anticipates a chance gain either in money or merchandise beyond a fair exchange (after allowing for reasonable profit) for the amount of money invested, is a gambling device that violates the statute. ’ ’ Following this…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Frost v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1901
  2. City of Moberly v. DeskinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913
  3. State v. GooginSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1918
  4. Snyder v. City of AllianceOhio Court of Appeals · 1931
  5. In re CullinanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1906

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. WileySupreme Court of Iowa · 1942
  2. Automatic Music & Vending Corp. v. Liquor Control CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Oatman v. Port Huron Chief of PoliceMichigan Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Gibson v. MartinMichigan Supreme Court · 1944
  5. MICHIGAN Ex Rel COMMISSIONER OF STATE POLICE v. NINE MONEY FALL GAMESMichigan Court of Appeals · 1983

6 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