People v. Ingraham
Michigan Supreme Court
Exceptions before judgment from Hillsdale. (Lane, J.) Submitted on briefs April 25, 1894. Decided June 2, 1894. Respondent was convicted of a violation of the local option law. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.
Respondent was convicted under an information charging him with having kept a saloon and place where intoxicating liquors were sold, in violation of Act No. 207, Laws of 1889, commonly called the “ Local Option Law." The errors assigned relate principally to the refusal of the court to give certain requests to charge, and to the charge as given. The defense was that respondent kept a lunch room, and sold only soft drinks.
The people introduced testimony to show that on October 12, 1892, several parties went into the defendant's place, and there called for, obtained, and drank lager beer, and…
2Cited by4 opinions
- People v. HatingerMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
- People v. Van DamMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- People v. EmmonsMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
- Commonwealth v. CriscuoloPhiladelphia County Court of Quarter Sessions · 1926