Legal Opinion

White v. Township of Millbrook

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1886PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Mecosta. (Fuller, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, J.

The plaintiffs were owners of certain real estate in the township of Millbrook, in the year 1882, on a portion of which they were engaged in lumbering. They were all non-residents of the township, but had an office for the transaction of their business located therein, on section 20, and which was occupied by their agent. This suit was brought by the plaintiffs in the county of Mecosta to recover for taxes paid by them to the township treasurer of township of Millbrook, which were assessed against them upon their said real estate and personal property in that township for the year 1882. The…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Merrill v. HumphreyMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
  2. Case v. DeanMichigan Supreme Court · 1867
  3. City of Detroit v. MartinMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
  4. First National Bank v. WatkinsMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
  5. Albany & Boston Mining Co. v. Auditor GeneralMichigan Supreme Court · 1877

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Detroit Citizens' Street-Railway Co. v. Common Council of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Mills v. Township of RichlandMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Auditor General v. HughittMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
  4. Canfield Salt & Lumber Co. v. Township of ManisteeMichigan Supreme Court · 1894

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API