Legal Opinion · Dissent

STATE, EX REL. WASHTENAW COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY v. Western Union Telegraph Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 10, 1953No. Calendar 44,941Published

1DissentReid, J.

I agree with Chief Justice Dethmers that there can be no discovery in this type'óf case.

I do not agree that there should be no injunction forbidding the receiving and transmitting of money (in Michigan) to be placed on bets outside of the State. Such illegal acts described in the statute as are committed within the State, the equity court has jurisdiction to enjoin.

The section of the act in question (CL 1948, § 692.-251 [Stat Ann § 18.901]) is as follows:

“Any building, vehicle or place used for the purpose of lewdness, assignation or prostitution or gambling, or used by, or kept for the use…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Wayne Prosecuting Attorney v. SillMichigan Supreme Court · 1945
  2. People Ex Rel. Attorney General v. HolschuhMichigan Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Carland v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1898
  4. People Ex Rel. Wayne Prosecuting Attorney v. BitontiMichigan Supreme Court · 1943
  5. People Ex Rel. Wayne Prosecuting Attorney v. TateMichigan Supreme Court · 1943

4 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