Minnesota Supreme Court, 1889

State v. Gluck

Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided November 5, 1889 · Gileillan

41 Minn. 553; 43 N.W. 483; 1889 Minn. LEXIS 416 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

Wm. H. Donahue and J. C. Worrall, for appellant., Moses E. Clapp, Attorney General, and Albert II. Hall, for the State.

Can I rely on this case?

Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.

(as of 9/30/2026)

Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1901, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.

Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

State v. Tracy (Minn. 1901)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Gileillan, C. J.

The complaint in this case is insufficient to show a breach of the ordinance. It merely charges that the defendant “did wilfully, unlawfully, and wrongfully fail and omit to close and keep closed during the whole of said day, the same being Sunday, a saloon,” etc., without showing in any way that he was owner of it, or in charge of it, or had any control of it, or of the matter of opening *554and closing it. Of course the ordinance cannot be deemed as aimed at any but those who are in some way responsible for the saloon being open, or whose duty it' is to keep it closed in obedience to the ordinance. As the order must be reversed and the prosecution dismissed on this ground, we do not consider it necessary to decide anjr of the other questions raised in the case.

Order reversed.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.