Legal Opinion
Hitchman v. Township of Oakland
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided January 8, 1951No. Docket 20, Calendar 44,848PublishedCited by 52 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCarr, J.
Plaintiffs brought this suit in equity to enjoin the enforcement of certain provisions of the zoning ordinance of the defendant township. Said ordinance was adopted in 1946 in accordánee with the provisions of PA 1943, No 184 (CL 1948, § 125.271 et seq. [Stat Ann 1949 Rev § 5.2963(1) et seq.]). The general purpose of the enabling act appears from its title, which reads as follows:
“An Act to provide for the establishment in the unincorporated portions of organized townships of zoning districts within which the proper use of land and natural resources may be encouraged or regulated by…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- City of North Muskegon v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
- Northwood Properties Co. v. Royal Oak City InspectorMichigan Supreme Court · 1949
- Senefsky v. City of Huntington WoodsMichigan Supreme Court · 1943
- Pere Marquette Railway Co. v. Muskegon Township BoardMichigan Supreme Court · 1941
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by52 opinions
- Bilbar Construction Co. v. Easttown Township Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- Christine Building Co. v. City of TroyMichigan Supreme Court · 1962
- Naegele Outdoor Advertising Co. of Minnesota, Inc. v. Village of MinnetonkaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
- Ed Zaagman, Inc. v. City of KentwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1979
- Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. CusickMichigan Supreme Court · 1963
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.