People ex rel. Reeder v. Treasurer of Wexford
Michigan Supreme Court
Mandamus. The facts are in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.
This case comes up on findings by the circuit judge in a proceeding in this court for mandamus, and the only question which is fairly open is upon the amount to be ordered paid. The proceeding is one substantially against the county and not personally against the treasurer except as a means to work out redress against the county. The circumstance that the incumbency of the office of county treasurer has changed in the progress of the events connected with the matter in controversy is of no importance. The office itself has continued and has been and is represented by an officer, and that is…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Knights v. Treasurer & Receiver GeneralMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
- Eureka Pipe Line Co. v. RiggsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1914
- Board of County Commissioners v. KaulSupreme Court of Kansas · 1908
- Wood v. State ex rel. SeilerIndiana Supreme Court · 1900
- Waterman-Waterbury Co. v. School District No. 4Michigan Supreme Court · 1914
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.