Legal Opinion

City of Detroit v. Township of Redford

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 27, 1931No. Docket No. 123, Calendar No. 35,365PublishedCited by 90 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNorth, J.

The city of Detroit filed this bill of complaint to compel an accounting and the payment to it by defendant township of money which plaintiff claims is due to it incident to two annexation proceedings; one in 1923, the other in 1926. Plaintiff’s bill was dismissed and it has appealed. The facts are stipulated. If plaintiff’s contention is sustained its proportionate share of the township’s personal property because of the 1923 annexation will be $15,773.22, and incident to that of 1926, $63,283.47. Detroit is incorporated under the so-called home-rule act (chapter 49, §§ 2228-2274, 1 Comp.…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Meister v. PeopleMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
  2. People v. Crucible Steel Co. of AmericaMichigan Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Marshall v. Wabash Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1918
  4. State v. SparrowMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Farm Products Co. v. JordanMichigan Supreme Court · 1924

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

3Cited by90 opinions

  1. Robinson v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
  2. City of Lansing v. Township of LansingMichigan Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Grimes v. Department of TransportationMichigan Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Coblentz v. City of NoviMichigan Supreme Court · 2006
  5. Soap & Detergent Ass'n v. Natural Resources CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1982

85 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