Opinion

300 Pin Ball, Slot or Marble Machines v. State ex rel. Mills

  • 264 P.2d 337
  • 1953 OK 349
  • 1953 Okla. LEXIS 627
Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Filed
Dec 1, 1953
Status
Published
Author
Arnold
On the bench
Halley, Johnson, Welch, Arnold, Davison, Williams, Corn, O'Neal, Blackbird
Cited by
1 cases

The opinion

ARNOLD, Justice

(concurring specially)-

I think that the record, stipulations of the parties and statements made at oral argument conclusively show that the owners of the pin ball machines did not intend to use them in the State of Oklahoma but intended to continue their shipment to purchasers in other states where their operation would not be prohibited by law.

That the machines are valuable property, cannot be and is not denied.

The machines were merely at temporary rest in the State of Oklahoma, not having been taken from the possession of public service warehousemen, and the interstate character thereof had not ceased. See the cases cited in the majority opinion.

The interstate character of the shipment not having ceased the machines were not subject to confiscation and should be released for shipment out of the bounds of the State of Oklahoma.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.