[DOWNLOAD] "Heater v. Boston & Montana Corp. Et Al." by Supreme Court of Montana * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free

📘 Read Now     📥 Download

eBook details

• Title: Heater v. Boston & Montana Corp. Et Al.
• Author : Supreme Court of Montana
• Release Date : January 20, 1929
• Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
• Pages : * pages
• Size : 66 KB

Description

Nuisances — Gaming — Abatement — Defendants Claiming Immunity on Ground of Connection with Fraternal Order — Evidence — Insufficiency — Attorney and Client — Findings — When Conclusive on Appeal. Gaming — "Keno" held Gambling Game. 1. Gambling is a generic term and embraces within its meaning all forms of play or game for stakes wherein one stands to win or lose as a matter of chance, and includes the game of "keno" as well as play at lottery. (Secs. 11149 et seq., Rev. Codes.) Same — Nuisances — Abatement — Defense that Club Connected with Fraternal Organization — Evidence — Insufficiency. 2. Evidence in an action to abate a gambling nuisance conducted by a club claiming immunity from prosecution for allowing gambling on the premises occupied by it, under Chapter 153, Laws of 1937, sec. 3, amending section 11159, Rev. Codes, by expressly providing that religious, fraternal or charitable organizations shall be excluded from the provisions of the Act prohibiting gambling of any kind, on the alleged ground that the club was connected with a fraternal organization or a dramatic branch thereof, held insufficient to show such connection, it on the other hand showing that there was no regularity of membership and that anyone whom the door-keeper, one of the defendants, felt like admitting, could enter and participate in the game of "keno" being played on the premises. Same — Citizen may bring Suit to Abate Nuisance. 3. Under section 11125, Revised Codes, the county attorney must, but any citizen may, bring an action in equity to abate a gambling nuisance; hence where the complainant was a citizen the court acquired jurisdiction of the cause. Same — Attorney Acting as Complainant, Prosecutor and Witness — When Supreme Court will not Pass on Question of Ethics. 4. While there may be ground for criticism of an attorney who acted as complainant in a suit to abate a gambling nuisance, and also as prosecutor and witness, all for a compensation of $250, where there was no evidence controverting any of the facts brought out by the prosecution there appears no reason why the supreme court should question the motive of complainant or the credibility of his testimony. Same — Cause Tried by Court without Jury — Findings of Court — When conclusive on Appeal. 5. In a case tried by the district court without a jury, the rule is that if there be any competent evidence in the record to sustain the courts findings they will not be disturbed on appeal. Page 503

Free Download "Heater v. Boston & Montana Corp. Et Al." PDF ePub Kindle