Legal Opinion

Dallmann v. Kluchesky

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 9, 1938PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.

Under the laws of this state, the city of Milwaukee may enact ordinances prohibiting gambling. The legislative branch of the city government may also, within constitutional limits, enact ordinances which classify as a nuisance theReeping in public places of devices readily adaptable to gambling.

The police officials of the city, acting under section 1069 of the city ordinances, have taken into their possession a “nickel-in-the-slot” machine. They found it in a restaurant *173where it had been placed by the owner with the consent of the restaurant proprietor, under an agreement to divide the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Lawton v. SteeleSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  2. Murphy v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  3. People v. . WestNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
  4. J. B. Mullen & Co. v. MoseleyIdaho Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Hack v. City of Mineral PointWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. City of Milwaukee v. Milwaukee Amusement, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
  2. City of South Milwaukee v. KesterCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2013
  3. City of Milwaukee v. Milbrew, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1942
  4. State v. HahnCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1996
  5. Benjamin v. City of ColumbusOhio Supreme Court · 1957

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