Legal Opinion

Daxanbeklar v. People

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided February 13, 1901PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Indictment for Keeping a Nuisance, as defined in section 7 of the dram-shop act. Error to the County Court of Mercer County; the Hon. W. T. Church, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1900.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Dibell

This was an information against plaintiff in error for keeping a nuisance, as defined in section 7 of the dram-shop act. It contained, four counts. The first and fourth were amended by the state’s attorney under leave of court, and the second was quashed. The trial before a jury was upon the first and fourth amended counts and the third original count, and a plea of not guilty. There was a verdict of guilty. Defendant was sentenced to confinement in the county jail for thirty days, and was fined $75, and an order was entered that the place be shut up and abated till plaintiff in error should…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Mayes v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1883
  2. Dunn v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1884
  3. East St. Louis Electric Street Railroad v. CauleyIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Mullinix v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1875
  5. Sutton v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1893

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. CollinsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1955
  2. Pioneer Fire-Proofing Co. v. CliffordAppellate Court of Illinois · 1906
  3. Gaul v. PeopleAppellate Court of Illinois · 1907
  4. Carter v. PeopleAppellate Court of Illinois · 1905
  5. Giroux v. PeopleAppellate Court of Illinois · 1907

6 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