Highway Commissioners v. Ely
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Clinton. (V. H. Smith, J.) Case. Defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.
The commissioner of highways sued Ely in justice’s court to recover the statutory penalty for willfully obstructing a ditch constructed for draining the highway, (How. Stat. § 1403,) and recovered judgment before a jury. He appealed, and another jury trial was had, and he brings the case here on writ of error.
*174The record discloses that the defendant was the owner of lands adjoining the highway; that there was a hollow or sag in the road in front of defendant’s lands, and on one side of the road-bed gravel had been taken for the purpose of repairing the road, leaving a dangerous pit. On…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State v. PrestonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1874
- McManus v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1860
- State v. AbramSupreme Court of Alabama · 1847
- Conrad v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
3Cited by22 opinions
- State Highway Board v. BaxterSupreme Court of Georgia · 1928
- Dull v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1899
- Askay v. MaloneyOregon Supreme Court · 1919
- King v. County of StarkNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1936
- Brownlow v. O'Donoghue Bros., Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1921
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.