Legal Opinion

Dohany v. City of Birmingham

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 17, 1942No. Docket No. 29, Calendar No. 41,522PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The decree entered below allows the city of Birmingham to deposit raw sewage into a watercourse on plaintiff's lands at certain periods, under certain conditions. I cannot agree that the decree should stand. On the record before us the city should be permanently enjoined from continuing a nuisance. The city, in effect, admits that under certain conditions raw sewage is discharged, through the city sewer, across plaintiff's lands. It claims the right to do so because the sewage is diluted at such times by surface water from excessive rainfall. The city's claim is thus stated in its brief:

"It…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Attorney General ex rel. Township of Wyoming v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
  2. People v. HulbertMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Monroe Carp Pond Co. v. River Raisin Paper Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Gundy v. Village of MerrillMichigan Supreme Court · 1930

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. White Lake Improvement Ass'n v. City of WhitehallMichigan Court of Appeals · 1970
  2. City of Detroit v. City of Highland ParkMichigan Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Clark v. City of SpringfieldMissouri Court of Appeals · 1951
  4. Kernen v. Homestead Development Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1999
  5. Genesco, Inc. v. Michigan Department of Environmental QualityMichigan Court of Appeals · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API