People ex rel. Hudson v. DeMill
Michigan Supreme Court
Information in the nature of a quo warranto. The information was filed to determine the legality of the election of the wardens and vestrymen of St. Paul’s Church, in the city of Detroit. The pleadings were as follows: Information.
Read the full summary
Information in the nature of a quo warranto. The information was filed to determine the legality of the election of the wardens and vestrymen of St. Paul’s Church, in the city of Detroit. The pleadings were as follows: Information. “ Albert Williams, Attorney General of the State of Michigan, who sues for the people of the said State, in this behalf, comes here before the Justices of the Supreme Court of the same people, on the eighteenth day of October, in the year one thousand eight hundred and sixty-six, and upon the relation of Elon W. Hudson, Frederick A. Stokes, ICirkland C. Barker,…
1Opinion of the Court
Cooley J.
It is commonly a source of regret when, a court is compelled to dispose of the case before it without passing upon the main questions raised; but the nature of the record in the present case is such as to leave us no alternative. We are clearly of opinion that the information is fatally defective in two particulars.
It is defective, firstly, in not showing in what manner the organization in which the defendants are accused of having usurped office became a body corporate. When any person, or association of persons, is charged with usurping the franchise of a corporation, it is…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People ex rel. Finnegan v. MaywormMichigan Supreme Court · 1858
- Leonard v. TaylorMichigan Supreme Court · 1864
3Cited by15 opinions
- Blynn v. City of PontiacMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
- State ex rel. Smith v. AndersonSupreme Court of Florida · 1890
- Eberstadt v. State Ex Rel. ArmisteadTexas Supreme Court · 1898
- Trainor v. Board of AuditorsMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Singleton v. Eureka CountyNevada Supreme Court · 1894
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.