Legal Opinion

Howell Township v. Rooto Corp.

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided October 11, 1999No. Docket 210667PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTalbot, J.

We are faced with a straightforward question of law: Does a township’s failure to timely record a newly adopted ordinance in its statutorily required “book of ordinances” render the ordinance unenforceable? We conclude that it does not.

On September 25, 1995, the Howell Township Board adopted Ordinance 53, a provision allowing it to recover from private enterprises the costs incurred by the township in responding to calls for assistance in connection with the release of hazardous waste materials. On October 4, 1995, the ordinance was published in accordance with the requirements of MCL…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Howell Township v. Rooto CorporationMichigan Court of Appeals · 2003
  2. Howell Township v. Rooto Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 2000

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

Powered by the Exa API