Legal Opinion

Couvelis v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 1, 1937No. Docket No. 120, Calendar No. 39,531PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBusi-inell, J.

Plaintiffs, doing business in the city of Benton Harbor, as Harbor Lunch, joined the people with them in a suit to recover a statutory penalty from defendant, Michigan Bell Telephone Company, because of its failure to furnish flat rate telephone service from October 10, 1934, to August 10, 19'35. The action was planted on 2 Comp. Laws 1929, § 11699, and damages -were claimed in the sum of $15,000.

Defendant denied that it refused to furnish flat rate service and said that one of the plaintiff’s telephone instruments was removed because the public generally was permitted to use the flat rate…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. People v. MarxhausenMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Attorney General, Ex Rel. Owen v. JoyceMichigan Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Michigan Telephone Co. v. City of Benton HarborMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
  4. In Re Estate of ReynoldsMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Ray Corporation v. Secretary of StateMichigan Supreme Court · 1927

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Detroit Police Officers Ass'n. v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Rockwell v. Crestwood School District Board of EducationMichigan Supreme Court · 1975
  3. People v. BuckleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Ottenwess v. Hawkeye Security InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1978
  5. Valentine v. Redford Township SupervisorMichigan Supreme Court · 1963

9 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