London v. City of Detroit
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtEdwards, J.
Plaintiff is owner of a bowling alley located on Grand River avenue in Detroit. He also owns 2 lots known as 6817-6823 Vinewood which are located nearby and which he has used, and seeks to continue to use, for parking the cars of bowling patrons.
The city of Detroit in a zoning ordinance, effective December 25, 1940, zoned these 2 lots for R2, a residence classification, requiring a special permit before property thus zoned could be used for a parking lot. No such permit has been obtained by plaintiff, and the city of Detroit, through its department of buildings and safety engineering, filed…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Long v. City of Highland ParkMichigan Supreme Court · 1950
- Certain-Teed Products Corp. v. Paris TownshipMichigan Supreme Court · 1958
- Hartka v. HartkaMichigan Supreme Court · 1956
- Biscay v. City of BurlingameCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Burra v. Aetna Life InsuranceDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1996
- Barry County v. EdmondsMichigan Court of Appeals · 1970