Legal Opinion

Pillon v. Attorney General

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 14, 1956No. Calendar 46,630PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBoyles, J.

Plaintiff filed this petition in this Court for a writ of mandamus to compel the defendants attorney general, secretary of State, director of elections and the board of State canvassers to approve a certain form of a petition, “Exhibit A,” which the plaintiff had submitted to the defendants, and which he desired to circulate to obtain a sufficient number .of signatures of qualified and registered electors of the State to propose a constitutional amendment relative to garnishment. The defendants refused to approve “Exhibit A,” taking the position that the law •did not require them, or any of…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Leininger v. Secretary of StateMichigan Supreme Court · 1947
  2. McLeod v. State Board of CanvassersMichigan Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Janigian v. City of DearbornMichigan Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Kosiba v. Wayne County Board of AuditorsMichigan Supreme Court · 1948
  5. State Highway Commissioner v. Ottawa Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1954

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

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. House Speaker v. GovernorMichigan Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Musselman v. GovernorMichigan Supreme Court · 1995
  3. State Board of Education v. Houghton Lake Community SchoolsMichigan Supreme Court · 1988
  4. AFSCME Council 25 v. State Employees' Retirement SystemMichigan Court of Appeals · 2011
  5. Frey v. Department of Management & BudgetMichigan Supreme Court · 1987

23 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