Rohde v. Ann Arbor Public Schools
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtTaylor, C.J.
The first issue in this case is whether a letter sent by a resident taxpayer to a public official that “request[s]” the official “investigate and halt” the use of public funds for illegal purposes is adequate to constitute a “demand” pursuant to MCL 129.61 so as to allow the taxpayer, should the public official not act, to undertake a legal challenge to the expenditure of the public funds. We conclude that a letter that conveys a call to act is sufficient to constitute a demand. Having *340concluded that the plaintiffs’ letters did constitute a demand as contemplated by MCL 129.61, we are…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Lewis v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Massachusetts v. MellonSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States Ex Rel. StevensSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- National Wildlife Federation v. Cleveland Cliffs Iron Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 2004
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- Lansing Schools Education Ass'n v. Lansing Board of EducationMichigan Supreme Court · 2010
- Trentadue v. Buckler Automatic Lawn Sprinkler CompanyMichigan Supreme Court · 2007
- Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation v. Nestlé Waters North America IncMichigan Supreme Court · 2007
- William Miller v. Allstate Ins CoMichigan Supreme Court · 2008
- Martin v. Secretary of StateMichigan Court of Appeals · 2008
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.