Village of Des Plaines v. Poyer

Decision Date19 January 1888
Citation14 N.E. 677,123 Ill. 348
PartiesVILLAGE OF DES PLAINES v. POYER.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from appellate court, First district.

Benjamin Poyer was the owner of a tract of land located within the corporate limits of the village of Des Plaines, about half a mile from the inhabited part of the village, and separated from it by the Des Plaines river. This land Poyer rented, and used for picnic purposes. On May 10, 1883, the village trustees passed an ordinance declaring picnics and open-air dances within the limits of the village a nuisance, and also making it a nuisance for any person to rent, use, or allow to be used any ground within the limits of the village for such purposes. In July, 1884, the village commenced a suit against Poyer, before a justice of the peace in Des Plaines, for a violation of this ordinance, committed on July 31, 1883. Poyer was fined $100 and costs by the justice, and took an appeal to the criminal court of Cook county. Upon a trial in the criminal court, before a jury, he was again found guilty, and the jury assessed the fine at $50. Upon this verdict the court entered judgment, and Poyer appealed to the appellate court, where the judgment of the criminal court was reversed, and the cause remanded. Upon a new trial in the criminal court, the defendant was found not guilty. Upon the appeal of the village to the appellate court, that tribunal affirmed its former decision and that of the criminal court at the second trial. From this judgment the village of Des Plaines now appeals.Stiles & Lewis

and C. S. Cutting, for appellant.

John Gibbons, for appellee.

SCHOLFIELD, J.

The only question involved in the present case is the validity of the following ordinance:

Section 1. That all public picnics and open-air dances within the limits of said village are hereby declared to be nuisances.

Sec. 2. That for any person or persons to rent, use, or allow to be used, any yard, ground, grove, or other real estate, within the corporate limits of the village of Des Plaines, for public picnic purposes, or for open-air dances, or to permit, or in any way allow, the use of such property for any purpose by which disorderly persons are gathered in or about said village of Des Plaines, shall constitute, and is hereby declared to be, a nuisance. Any person creating or permitting any nuisance mentioned and declared in this ordinance to exist, having the right or power to abate the same, shall be subject to a fine of not less than fifty dollars, and not exceeding one hundred dollars, in every case; and each renting, using, or allowing to be used, of any such premises for the purposes aforesaid, or any of them, shall be deemed the creating of a new nuisance and the author thereof be subject to a like fine.’

The village is incorporated under the general law in relation to the incorporation of villages, and is, by that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
39 cases
  • American Tobacco Company and American Car Company v. Missouri Pacific Railway Company
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 31, 1912
    ...v. Joliet, 79 Ill. 25; Bank v. Sarlls, 28 N.E. 434; Tiedeman's Lim. of Police Power, sec. 122; Wood on Nuisances, secs. 742, 744; Village v. Poyer, 14 N.E. 677; Denver Mullen, 3 P. 393; Everett v. Council Bluffs, 46 Iowa 66; State v. Mayor, 29 N.J.L. 170; Beach's Public Corporations, secs. ......
  • Young v. Bryco Arms
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • December 31, 2001
    ...to use the streets and public ways without fear, apprehension and injury." In support, plaintiffs rely upon Village of Des Plaines v. Poyer, 123 Ill. 348, 14 N.E. 677 (1888), for the origin of this right. In Poyer, the Illinois Supreme Court was called upon to decide the validity of a villa......
  • Young v. Bryco Arms
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • November 18, 2004
    ...to themselves and to their families." As authority for the existence of such a right, plaintiffs rely on Village of Des Plaines v. Poyer, 123 Ill. 348, 351, 14 N.E. 677 (1888), in which this court stated, in dicta, that "the right of the people to be free from disturbance and reasonable app......
  • Bielecki v. City of Port Arthur
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • January 20, 1928
    ...is not a nuisance, but can acquire that character from the locality in which it is operated. Thus, in Village of Des Plaines v. Poyer, 123 Ill. 348, 14 N. E. 677, 5 Am. St. Rep. 524, it was said that a public dance was not necessarily a nuisance. In Thoenebe v. Mosby, 257 Pa. 1, 101 A. 98, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT