Commissioner of Highways v. Cobb
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Oakland. (Moore, J.) Trespass for obstructing a highway. Defendant brings-error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
This is an action to recover the prescribed penalty for obstructing a public highway.1 The-only question involved in the case is whether the road in question is a public highway. The findings of the court, below show that the Pontiac & Lapeer Plank-Boad Company, acting under the authority of its charter, granted by Act No. 240, Laws of 1848, by which the provisions of *396Act No. 62 of the same year were made applicable, constructed the road in question, and maintained and collected toll from travelers over the same from 1854 up to November, 1888, when it abandoned the road, and the public…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People v. DavidsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- State v. MaineSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1858
3Cited by4 opinions
- Sieling v. State Roads CommissionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1931
- Scheper v. ClarkSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1923
- Scovel v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
- Canada v. LaJoye-YoungDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 2021