State v. Messolongitis
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Complaints in the municipal court for Minneapolis for obstructing sidewalks in tbe city of Minneapolis. The causes were tried separately before W. A. Kerr, J., without a jury, and defendants were convicted. From orders denying their separate motions for a new trial, defendants severally appealed.
Read the full summary
Complaints in the municipal court for Minneapolis for obstructing sidewalks in tbe city of Minneapolis. The causes were tried separately before W. A. Kerr, J., without a jury, and defendants were convicted. From orders denying their separate motions for a new trial, defendants severally appealed. The provisions of section 7 of the ordinance of the city of Minneapolis concerning streets and sidewalks were not intended by the city council to be applied to a duly-licensed foot peddler while in the reasonable use of the sidewalks and streets of said city for the purpose of his vocation. State v.…
1Opinion of the CourtCanty, J.
Under an ordinance of the city of Minneapolis, said appellant, *169Messolongitis, was convicted of placing and exposing for sale goods, wares and merchandise on the sidewalk in that city. He was fined therefor the sum of $5, in default of payment thereof to be imprisoned in the workhouse of said city for the period of five days; and, from an order denying a new trial, he appeals to this court.
It was admitted on the trial that he was at the time a duly-licensed foot peddler, and he contends that, on the evidence, there was no ordinance under which he could be convicted of the alleged charge.
The…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. RayantisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
3Cited by1 opinion
- City of Duluth v. EsterlySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911