Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

04/01/76 KENT COUNTY PROSECUTOR v. ROBERT EMMETT

April 1, 1976

KENT COUNTY PROSECUTOR
v.
ROBERT EMMETT GOODRICH CORPORATION



Levin, J. Kavanagh, C. J., and Williams and Fitzgerald, JJ., concurred with Levin, J. Ryan, J., took no part in the decision of this case. Lindemer, J. (dissenting). Coleman, J., concurred with Lindemer, J.

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

Opinion of the Court

1. Obscenity -- Civil Obscenity Statute -- Motion Pictures.

The civil obscenity statute is directed to barring the sale, distribution, acquisition or possession of written or printed paper materials, not the exhibition of a motion picture film (MCL 600.2938; MSA 27A.2938).

Dissenting Opinion

Coleman and Lindemer, JJ.

2. Obscenity -- Civil Obscenity Statute -- Motion Pictures.

The civil obscenity statute is directed to the exhibition of motion pictures and reading it to eliminate motion picture film is strained (MCL 600.2938; MSA 27A.2938).

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Levin

Plaintiffs Kent County Prosecutor and the City Attorney of Grand Rapids brought a complaint against defendant Robert Emmett Goodrich Corporation for injunctive relief to prevent the showing of the film "The Devil in Miss Jones". The Kent Circuit Court, John H. Vander Wal, J., issued a permanent injunction. The Court of Appeals, T. M. Burns, P. J., and McGregor, J. (Holbrook, J., Dissenting), reversed (Docket No. 18420). Plaintiff appeals. Held:

The civil obscenity statute is aimed at the sale, distribution, acquisition or possession of written or printed paper materials, not the exhibition of a motion picture film.

Lindemer, J., with Coleman, J., Concurring, Dissented on the grounds that the civil obscenity statute is directed to the exhibition of motion pictures and reading it to eliminate motion picture film is strained. The statute does not say that the picture, photograph, figure or image forbidden are on writing paper or book paper.

53 Mich App 267; 218 NW2d 771 (1974) affirmed.

The issue is whether the civil obscenity statute may be applied to bar the showing of the film "The ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.