McKinlay v. Crossman

Plaintiff appeals from a summary judgment below granted to defendants.

This case, and the controversy involved, is a familiar one to this Court. The fact situation is reported in Houston v. McKinlay (1966), 4 Mich App 94, and Crossman v. Hanson (1966), 4 Mich App 98. In the former ease we determined that where a city charter provision makes the city council the judge of the eligibility and qualifications of its members,1 that a writ of quo ivarranto2 will not lie to correct an alleged disqualification of a city councilman. In the latter case, it was the holding of this Court that mandamus does…