Legal Opinion

Kinnie v. Bare

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 2, 1888PublishedCited by 29 opinions

Error to Eaton. (Hooker, J.) Certiorari to review proceedings establishing a drain. Petitioner brings error from order of circuit court affirming such proceedings. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.

Proceedings purporting to be instituted under Act No. 227 of the Public Acts of 1885 were taken for the purpose of laying out and establishing a drain in the township of Benton, Eaton county. A petition was presented to the defendant, as drain commissioner of the township, signed by five freeholders of the township, requesting him to locate and establish a drain substantially as follows:

“ Commencing at about 84 rods north of the south-east corner of section twenty-three, in said township number three north, of range number four west; thence north-westerly 'across said section twenty-three,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People ex rel. Detroit & Howell Railroad v. Township BoardMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
  2. Ryerson v. UtleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1868
  3. Anderson v. HillMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
  4. Benjamin v. Manistee River Improvement Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1880
  5. Kroop v. FormanMichigan Supreme Court · 1875

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. In Re Brewster Street Housing SiteMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Allen v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
  3. State ex rel. Applegate v. TaylorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
  4. State ex rel. Utick v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
  5. Brown v. GeraldSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1905

24 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