Legal Opinion

Lairmore v. Drake and Borough

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 9, 1948PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKelly, J.

Section 1, Laws of Oregon, 1876, now constituting Section 23-928, Vol. 3, O. C. L. A., pp. 132,133, in so far as it is pertinent to the issues here, is as follows:

“Each and every person who shall deal, play, or carry on, open or cause to be opened, or who shall conduct either as owner, proprietor, or employee, whether for hire or not, any game of faro, monte, roulette, rouge et noir, lanquenet, rondo, vingtun (or twenty-one), poker, drawpoker, brag, bluff, thaw, or any banking or any other game played with cards, dice, or any other device, whether the same be played for money, cheek, credits,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Triplett v. SeelbachCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1890
  2. Nagle v. RandallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. LangleyOregon Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Petersen v. FielderCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  3. Unander v. PASQUILLOregon Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Lee v. Oregon Racing CommissionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API