People ex rel. Attorney General v. Village of Highland Park
Michigan Supreme Court
Quo warranto. Information in the nature of a quo warranto to test the right of respondent to exercise the franchises of a municipal corporation. The facts are stated in the ■opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
The information in this case was filed by the Attorney General, and charges that the respondent has, since the 13th day of May, 1891, usurped the fran•chise of being a municipal corporation. To the information the respondent interposed a plea, and to this plea the relator demurred.
The facts necessary to an understanding of the questions involved are these: The respondent was incorporated by Act No. 371, Local Acts of 1889. The village council consisted of six trustees, and the other village officers were the president of the council, clerk, treasurer, assessor, constable, and street…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cary v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1884
- Philips v. WickhamNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
- Case v. State ex rel. MannIndiana Supreme Court · 1879
- Woodside v. WaggSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1880
- Morton v. LeeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1882
3Cited by7 opinions
- Greyhound Corp. v. Public Service CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
- Bauer v. Township Board of DenmarkMichigan Supreme Court · 1909
- People ex rel. Fuller v. PalmerMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- Barry v. Board of EducationNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1917
- State ex rel. Hatfield v. FarrarWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1921
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.