Attorney General ex rel. Dingeman v. Lacy
Michigan Supreme Court
Information in the nature of quo warranto by Grant Fellows, attorney general, on the relation of Harry J. Dingeman, against Arthur J. Lacy, judge of the court of domestic relations for the county of Wayne, to try respondent’s title to said office. Respondent demurred to the information. Demurrer overruled and judgment of ouster entered.
1Opinion of the CourtBrooke, J.
(after stating the fact). Considering the history of legislation under the Constitution of 1850, it is apparent that there had grown up a pernicious practice on the part of the legislature in passing local acts. The practice was bad in two very important particulars. In the first place, much of the legislation thus enacted constituted a direct and unwarranted interference in purely local affairs and an invasion of the principles of local self-government. In the second place, such legislation affecting as it did certain limited localities in the State, the senators and *338representatives from…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- People ex rel. Breckon v. Board of Election CommissionersIllinois Supreme Court · 1906
- State ex rel. West v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1896
- Ex parte CorlissNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1907
- People v. . DunnNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Allor v. Board of AuditorsMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- People v. TownsendMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
- Wayne Circuit Judges v. Wayne CountyMichigan Supreme Court · 1969
- City of Springfield v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1929
- Roberts v. LedgerwoodSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
- Tribbett v. Village of MarcellusMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.