Opinion
No. 34227
Decided January 12, 1955.
Supreme Court — Dismissal — No debatable constitutional question involved — Intoxicating liquor permit — Revocation or suspension — Knowledge of gambling on premises — Evidence — Liquor agent's testimony as to employee's admission — Waiver of hearsay rule by failure to object.
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County.
Mr. C.G. Yarwood, for appellant.
Mr. C. William O'Neill, attorney general, Mr. Robert Krupansky and Mr. Kiehner Johnson, for appellees.
It is ordered and adjudged that this appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason that no debatable constitutional question is involved.
Appeal dismissed.
WEYGANDT, C.J., MATTHIAS, HART, ZIMMERMAN, STEWART, BELL and TAFT, JJ., concur.