Legal Opinion

Soper v. Michal

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided June 25, 1914PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal from the Superior Court of Baltimore City. (Heuisler, J.) The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.

1Opinion of the CourtStockbribge, J.

This is an action of replevin to recover ninety-eight machines of the variety commonly designated as “slot machines,” a roulette wheel and the appurtenant mechanism, which had been siezed by the appellants as Police 'Commissioners of Baltimore City.. At the time of the seizure all of the articles were in the possession of the appellee, in a single room, part of the first floor of a building on Bom Alley, the remainder of the floor being occupied and used as a carpenter shop. The ownership of the property in question is not entirely clear. Some portion of the machines seem to have belonged to…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bobel v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Board of Police Commissioners v. WagnerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1901
  3. Loiseau v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896
  4. Lang v. MerwinSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1905
  5. State v. GaughanWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1904

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. One Hundred & Fifty-Eight Gaming DevicesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985
  2. Snyder v. City of AllianceOhio Court of Appeals · 1931
  3. Bell v. Board of County CommissionersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1950
  4. Dail v. PriceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1944
  5. Good v. Board of Police CommissionersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1920

3 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