Jasnowski v. Board of Assessors
Michigan Supreme Court
Certiorari to Wayne; Mandell, J. Mandamus by Charles H. Jasnowski, prosecuting attorney of the county of Wayne, on relation of Julius L. Krimmel against Daniel L. Dilworth and others, constituting the board of assessors of the said county, to compel the respondents to assess motor vehicles in the city of Detroit. An order denying the writ is reviewed by relator bn certiorari.
1Opinion of the CourtBird, J.
This proceeding questions, upon constitutional grounds, the validity of the Michigan motor vehicle law, passed by the legislature of 1915, the same being Act No. '302 of that session (1 Comp. Laws 1915, § 4797 et seq.).
1. The validity of the act is assailed because the legislature failed to observe the constitutional requirement that “no law shall embrace more than one object.” Article 5, § 21. The title of the act reads:
_ “An act to provide for the registration, identification and regulation of motor vehicles, operated on the public highways of this State and of the operators of such…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Robison v. MinerMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Union Trust Co. v. Common CouncilMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
- Oil City v. Oil City Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Vicksburg Bank v. WorrellMississippi Supreme Court · 1889
- People Ex Rel. Commonwealth Insurance v. ColemanNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Naudzius v. LahrMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
- C. F. Smith Co. v. FitzgeraldMichigan Supreme Court · 1935
- Smallwood v. JeterIdaho Supreme Court · 1926
- Ingels v. RileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
- Union Steam Pump Sales Co. v. Secretary of StateMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.