Rattenbury v. Common Council
Michigan Supreme Court
Certiorari to Wayne; Carpenter, J. Mandamus by George Rattenbury to compel the common council of the village of North ville to approve a liquor bond. From an order denying the writ, relator brings certiorari.
Read the full summary
Certiorari to Wayne; Carpenter, J. Mandamus by George Rattenbury to compel the common council of the village of North ville to approve a liquor bond. From an order denying the writ, relator brings certiorari. Relator, desiring to sell intoxicating liquors at retail under the provisions of the general liquor law of the State, presented to the common council a bond, duly executed, and being in form such a bond as is required to be approved by the common council and filed with the county treasurer before the applicant is entitled to enter upon the business. The respondent was organized under the…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, C. J.
(after stating the facts). In disposing of this case we shall treat the bond as sufficient. The sole question, therefore, is, Is that place in a tavern or hotel, where intoxicating liquors are sold, within the inhibition of the ordinance ? The statute provides that villages may, by ordinance, “ suppress saloons for the sale of spirituous and intoxicating liquors, and license taverns.” 1 Comp. Laws 1897, § 2769, subd. 7. Counsel for relator maintain that the room of a hotel, set apart for the sale of intoxicating liquors at retail, is not a saloon, within the meaning of the statute. The vice…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Timm v. Common Council of Caledonia StationMichigan Supreme Court · 1907
- Fuchs v. Common CouncilMichigan Supreme Court · 1911