Legal Opinion

People v. Hinchman

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 28, 1889PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Exceptions before judgment from Berrien. (O’Hara, J.) Information for tbe illegal sale of liquor by a druggist. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.

The information charged Hinchman as follows:

*588“ That heretofore, to wit, on the seventeenth day of August, in the year one thousand eight hundred and eighty-seven, at the township of Ohickaming, in said Berrien county, did sell, furnish, and deliver to one Walter Berger certain spirituous liquors, to wit, one half pint of whisky, as a beverage, he, the said Burwell Hinchman, being then and there a person whose business consisted in part of the sale of drugs and medicines, and said liquors not being then and there sold for medicinal, mechanical, or sacramental purposes, contrary to the form of…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Kain v. . LarkinNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  2. Felix v. MillikenDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1978
  3. State v. Ah LeeOregon Supreme Court · 1890
  4. McDonald v. CaseyMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Peters v. Eaton Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1908

1 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