City Savings Bank v. Huebner
Michigan Supreme Court
Mandamus. Belator applied for mandamtis to compel respondent to deposit with it certain funds of the county, in accordance with a contract claimed to have been entered into by it in December, 1890, with the board of auditors and outgoing county treasurer, by which relator was to act as depository of such funds for a term of two years.
1Per curiam
Upon the argument of this motion, the board of auditors have, by our premission, intervened, so that the Court has before it the City Savings Bank, claiming to be a depository of public funds, the treasurer, and the board of auditors, who represent the county of Wayne, and who (the treasurer and board) are authorized to designate the depositories under the law. We are first to construe the act of 1879. This is necessary, as the relator claims that it entered into a contract with the out-going treasurer and the board of auditors to act as a depository for the term of two years. The question…
2Cited by3 opinions
- In re State Treasurer's SettlementNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
- Palo Alto County v. UlrichSupreme Court of Iowa · 1924
- County of Sanilac v. BurgessMichigan Supreme Court · 1933