Legal Opinion

United States Electric Fire-alarm Co. v. City of Big Rapids

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1889PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to Mecosta. (Palmer, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error. Tbe facts are stated in tbe opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.

This cause was tried before the court without a jury, who, on' request of the parties, made a finding of facts and law, from which it appears that the city of Big Rapids has a volunteer fire department, consisting of six fire companies, — five hose companies, and one hook and ladder company, — and that the firemen who compose the various companies reside within a radius of three-fourths of a mile from the court-house in said city.

On June 6, 1887, the common council of the city of Big Rapids appointed a committee of five members of the council to consider the various propositions for a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Walter A. Wood Reaping & Mowing Machine Co. v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
  2. Plano Manufacturing Co. v. EllisMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Mansfield Machine Works v. Common CouncilMichigan Supreme Court · 1886

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Manning v. School District No. 6Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1905
  2. Schliess v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Haney-Campbell Co. v. Preston Creamery Ass'nSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
  4. Sherrod v. DuffyMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Sullivan v. Ross' EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1900

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API