Legal Opinion

State v. Logan

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided June 4, 1900PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from tbe Oooper Circuit Court.—Hon. Samuel Davis, Special Judge. (1) There is not a particle of testimony in this record, to the effect that the place kept by defendant was a place where there was buying or selling of stock, bonds, petroleum, provisions, cotton, grain or agricultural products on margins or otherwise without the intention of receiving and paying for the property or of delivering the- property; or that the party buying or selling did not intend to…

Read the full summary

Appeal from tbe Oooper Circuit Court.—Hon. Samuel Davis, Special Judge. (1) There is not a particle of testimony in this record, to the effect that the place kept by defendant was a place where there was buying or selling of stock, bonds, petroleum, provisions, cotton, grain or agricultural products on margins or otherwise without the intention of receiving and paying for the property or of delivering the- property; or that the party buying or selling did not intend to actually receive the same if purchased or.deliver the same if sold; but on the contrary, each and every witness for the…

1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.

Defendant was indicted and convicted for violating the provision of section 3933, Revised Statutes, 1889, imposing a penalty for keeping a place where dealing in “margins” and “futures” in stocks and agricultural products is prohibited. That statute declares that it shall be unlawful for any person to keep a place wherein is conducted the buying or selling of stocks, grain or other products, either on margins or otherwise without any intention of receiving *586and paying for the property so bought, or of delivering the property so sold; or, wherein is conducted or permitted the buying or selling…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Crawford v. SpencerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
  2. State v. GritznerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
  3. Schreiner, Flack & Co. v. OrrMissouri Court of Appeals · 1893
  4. State v. TindallMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Crockett v. St. Louis & Hannibal Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1910
  2. McClanahan v. PayneMissouri Court of Appeals · 1900

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API