State v. Johnson
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Palo Alto District Court. — Hoh\ W. B. Quar-toN, Judge.- The defendants are accused of maintaining a public billiard ball, in wbicb minors were permitted to remain and take part in playing billiards. Tbe court directed a verdict of acquittal on which judgment was entered. The' state appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtLadd, J.
— It may be conceded that the game of billiards is essentially different from that of pool, and that, in allowing minors to engage in the latter game, tire law was not violated. See Squire v. State, 66 Ind. 317; Sikes v. State, 67 Ala. 77. But, when engaged in the game they remained in the defendants’ room, containing two tables on which either game might b.e played. It is quite immaterial whether the minor indulges in any game whatever. If he is permitted to enter the room and remain therein for any purpose, and that room is a billiard hall, the keeper is amenable to the penalties of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Sikes v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
- Squier v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1879
3Cited by2 opinions
- Village of Atwood v. OtterIllinois Supreme Court · 1920
- Town of Eros v. PowellSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1915