People v. Wenzel
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kalamazoo. (Buck, J.) Respondent was convicted of engaging in the liquor business in violation of an ordinance of the city of Kalamazoo, and sentenced to pay a fine of $5. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.
The defendant was' convicted of liquor selling under a city ordinance which imposed a penalty for engaging in the business of selling intoxicating liquor within the city of Kalamazoo without first obtaining a license from the city authorities. The validity of the ordinance is attacked.
The city charter was enacted in 1883, and section 24 of chapter 17 of that act (No. 337) prescribed the “powers and duties of the city council.” This section contained 44 subdivisions, and in these were contained most, if not all, of the subjects upon, which-the council was given authority to act. Subdivision 25…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Sherlock v. StuartMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
- Kellogg v. City of OshkoshWisconsin Supreme Court · 1861
- Supervisors of Walworth County v. Village of WhitewaterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1863
- Gordon v. PeopleMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- People v. FurmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Edwards v. Auditor GeneralMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
- Yarger v. City of HastingsMichigan Supreme Court · 1965
- Michigan Employers Casualty Co. v. DoucetteMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
- Hopkins v. SandersMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
- Port Huron Engine & Thresher Co. v. Township of Port HuronMichigan Supreme Court · 1916
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.