Case Name: PEOPLE v. BRONKHURST
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1940-10-07
Citations: 294 Mich. 640
Docket Number: Docket No. 134, Calendar No. 41,000
Parties: PEOPLE v. BRONKHURST.
Judges: Chandler, Wiest, and Butzel, JJ., concurred with McAllister, J.
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 294
Pages: 640–648

Head Matter:
PEOPLE v. BRONKHURST.
1. Words and Phrases — Public Dance Hall.
A publie dance hall is primarily devoted to dancing (2 Comp. Laws 1929, §§ 8903-8910, as amended).
2. Townships — Public Dance Halls — Statutes.
Insofar as dance halls are concerned, statute regulating publie billiard and pool rooms, dance halls, bowling alleys and soft-drink emporiums outside of incorporated cities and villages applies to publie dance halls alone (2 Comp. Laws 1929, §§ 8903-8910, as amended).
3. Innkeepers — Dance Halls — Statutes—Intoxicating Liquors.
Defendant who conducts a tavern in which, beer, wine and liquor are sold under license by the liquor control commission and, after compliance with all regulations of the township, county and State authorities by obtaining a dance-hall permit after approval thereof by the township board and sheriff, permitted dancing on an 18' x 24' space in 40' x 60' tavern merely incidentally .to the other business therein conducted, held, not guilty of violation of statute regulating publie dance halls (2 Comp. Laws 1929, §§ 8903-8910; Act No. 8, Pub. Acts 1933 [Ex. Sess.]).
Bushnell, C. J., and Sharpe, J., dissenting.
Appeal from Ottawa; Miles (Fred T.), J.
Submitted April 25, 1940.
(Docket No. 134, Calendar No. 41,000.)
Decided October 7, 1940.
Myrtle Bronkliurst was convicted of operating a public dance hall without having a license.
Beversed.
Thomas Read, Attorney General, and Elbern Parsons, Prosecuting’ Attorney, for the people.
Harold E. Store and Matthew G. Loche, for defendant.

Opinion:
McAllister, J.
Respondent, in compliance -with the regulations of the liquor control commission, obtained, a dance-hall permit after approval by the township board and the sheriff. She conducts a tavern, and is licensed to do so by the liquor control commission. Because dancing is permitted with phonograph music, it cannot be said that she conducts a public dance hall and is subject to the provisions of Act No. 53, Pub. Acts 1921, as amended (2 Comp. Laws 1929, § 8903-8910, as amended [Staff Ann. §18.491-18.498]), regulating public dance halls outside incorporated cities and villages. A public dance hall is primarily devoted to dancing. On respondent's premises, dancing is merely incidental to the other business conducted. When the legislation above-mentioned was enacted, there was in existence in this State no business similar to that now carried on by respondent. Taverns, as conducted in this case, came into existence in 1933, with the enactment of the liquor control statute. Public dance halls did exist, however, at the time Act No. 53 went into effect, and have continued to exist ever since; and the act has application to them alone.
Respondent complied with all of. the regulations of the township, county, and State authorities. If it be sought to make taverns subject to the same laws as public dance halls, recourse may be had to the legislature. Respondent was guilty of no violation of the statute.
Judgment is reversed.
Chandler, Wiest, and Butzel, JJ., concurred with McAllister, J.