Legal Opinion
State v. Rosenfield
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided July 1, 1910No. Nos. 16,519—(21)PublishedCited by 10 opinions
Defendants were convicted in the municipal court of Minneapolis of the offense of permitting a_ person under twenty:one years of age to be and remain in a certain dance house owned and kept by them. From an order, Charles L. Smith, J., denying defendants’ motion for a new trial, they appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtStart, C. J.
The defendants were charged by complaint in the municipal court of the city of Minneapolis with the offense of permitting, on March 20, 1909, a person under the age of twenty-one years to be and to remain in a dance house owned and managed by them. The prosecution was based upon E. L. 1905, § 4936, which is as follows:
“Whoever permits any person under the age of twenty-one years to be or remain in any dance house,- concert saloon, place where intoxicating liquors are. sold or given away, or in any place of entertainment injurious to the morals, owned, kept or managed by him *302in whole or in…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. HowardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- State v. HeckSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1877
- State v. QuackenbushSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- State v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
- State v. AbrischSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- State v. TaylorSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1965
- State v. LoomisMontana Supreme Court · 1925
- Town of Linden v. FischerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
- Bounty Ballroom v. BainCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1948
- State ex rel. Greenberg v. EricksonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.