Legal Opinion
Bogart v. Township of Lamotte
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided January 24, 1890PublishedCited by 17 opinions
Error to Sanilac. (Beach, J.) Assumpsit on township bond. Plaintiff ■ brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
Plaintiff brought suit in the court below to recover the amount due on a bond issued by the township board of the defendant, and which reads as follows, viz.:
“No. 2. BOND. $153.00.
“•Know all men by these Presents, That we, the undersigned, members of the town board of the township of Lamotte, in the county of Sanilac and State of Michigan, do, for and in behalf of said township, bind ourselves, and our successors in office, firmly, by these presents, to pay to John McGill or order the sum of one hundred and fifty-three dollars ($153.00), to be paid out of the taxes of one thousand eight…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Police Jury v. BrittonSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Starin v. . the Town of GenoaNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
- Rogers v. BurlingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1866
- Gregory v. WendellMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Gause v. ClarksvilleU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri · 1879
3Cited by17 opinions
- Alan v. Wayne CountyMichigan Supreme Court · 1972
- City of Huron v. Second Ward Sav. BankCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1898
- Edwards Hotel & City Street Railroad v. City of JacksonMississippi Supreme Court · 1910
- McCurdy v. County of ShiawasseeMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
- Uncas National Bank v. City of SuperiorWisconsin Supreme Court · 1902
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.