Legal Opinion

Fitch v. Board of Auditors of Claims Against Manitou County

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 12, 1903No. Docket Nos. 3, 4PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Certiorari to Charlevoix; Mayne, J. Separate mandamus proceedings by Dwight H. Fitch and Arthur L. Fitch, copartners as Fitch & Fitch, and by Robert W. Kane, to compel the board of auditors of claims against Manitou county to audit and allow certain claims. From orders granting the writs, the several townships interested bring certiorari.

1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.

We are asked in these two proceedings, which raise the same issue, to reverse the order of the court below issuing a mandamus compelling the respondent to audit certain claims; and the main question involved relates to the constitutionality of a joint resolution passed at the last session of the legislature, and found on pages 382-385, Pub. Acts 1901.

As appears by that resolution, the county of Manitou was disorganized, and part of its territory attached to Charlevoix county and part to Leelanau county, by Act No. 362, Local Acts 1895. Sections 6 and 9 of that act provided a method for the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Town of Guilford v. . the Supervisors of Chenango CountyNew York Court of Appeals · 1855
  2. State ex rel. Mc Curdy v. TappanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1872
  3. Bissell v. HeathMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Streeter v. PatonMichigan Supreme Court · 1859
  5. People ex rel. Gale v. Supervisor of OnondagaMichigan Supreme Court · 1867

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People v. RaubMichigan Court of Appeals · 1967
  2. People v. HallMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
  3. McBride v. JacobMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Sabater v. Corte de Distrito de PonceSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1938
  5. Sabater v. District CourtSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1938

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API