Legal Opinion

Linski v. City of Detroit

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 3, 1932No. Docket No. 88, Calendar No. 36,502PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWiest, J.

In opening an avenue, through a subdivision in the city of Detroit, all of lot No. 161 was taken, under the power of eminent domain, and a strip thereof alongside of lot No. 160 was in excess of land needed or used for the street as planned and established. Plaintiff owns lot No. 160, and filed the bill herein to set aside assessments upon his lot for paving the street and constructing a sidewalk.

If plaintiff’s lot abuts the street the assessments are valid; otherwise not.' The city condemned excess land and now owns such excess strip alongside of and between plaintiff’s lot and the street as…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Panfil v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1929

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Emmons v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Armstrong v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Marqua v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
  4. Evensen v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Vetal v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1934

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

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

Powered by the Exa API