Legal Opinion
Stellwagen v. Dingman
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided December 10, 1924No. Docket No. 48PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SlíAKPE, J.
On October 28, 1922, the following petition was presented to the defendant Dingman, county drain commissioner of Wayne county:
“To the County Drain Commissioner of the County of Wayne.
“Your petitioners respectively show that they are (freeholders of the townships of Nankin, Romulus and Van Burén) Board of Road Commissioners, in the county of Wayne and State of Michigan, and that the said petitioners are (the owners of land) liable to an assessment for benefits on account of a certain drain known and designated as the ‘McCIaughrey drain,’ situated in the townships of Nankin, Romulus…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Township of Clarence v. DickinsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
- Cummings v. GarnerMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
- Toledo, Saginaw & Muskegon Railway Co. v. ShaferMichigan Supreme Court · 1916
- Troost v. FellowsMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
- Heliker v. Oakland CountyMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
3Cited by8 opinions
- Elba Township v. Gratiot County Drain CommissionerMichigan Supreme Court · 2013
- Township of Lake v. MillarMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
- Sterling Bank of Sleeper & Chamberlain v. ScottMichigan Supreme Court · 1925
- Altermatt v. DillmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
- Squier v. NashMichigan Supreme Court · 1927
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.