Elliott v. Kalkaska Supervisors
Michigan Supreme Court
Mandamus.
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.
Each of these relators presented claims allowed by the proper board of health, for services and other dues incurred under their duty to take measures to prevent the spread of small-pox. The supervisors allowed more or less of the accounts, but refused to allow the rest. In their answers they present various supposed excuses for the disallowance. None of them are such as they could lawfully rely upon.
Mr. Elliott’s claim is for services as nurse in the pest-house, at four dollars a day, — allowed by the supervisors at *453two dollars. There is a showing made, but contradicted, that the board of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People ex rel. Bristow v. Supervisors of Macomb Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1855
- Rae v. Mayor of FlintMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
3Cited by20 opinions
- City of Rapid City v. BolandSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1978
- Board of Supervisors v. Board of SupervisorsMichigan Supreme Court · 1909
- Township of Cedar Creek v. Board of SupervisorsMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
- McKillop v. Board of Supervisors of Cheboygan Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1898
- Bartlett v. DahlstenNebraska Supreme Court · 1920
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.