United States Electric Fire-alarm Co. v. City of Big Rapids
Michigan Supreme Court
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
- Walter A. Wood Reaping & Mowing Machine Co. v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
- Plano Manufacturing Co. v. EllisMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Mansfield Machine Works v. Common CouncilMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by6 opinions
- Manning v. School District No. 6Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1905
- Schliess v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
- Haney-Campbell Co. v. Preston Creamery Ass'nSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Sherrod v. DuffyMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
- Sullivan v. Ross' EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.