Legal Opinion

Rohde v. Ann Arbor Public Schools

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 25, 2007No. Docket 128768PublishedCited by 36 opinions

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

  1. Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Lewis v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. Massachusetts v. MellonSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  4. Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States Ex Rel. StevensSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  5. 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

  1. Lansing Schools Education Ass'n v. Lansing Board of EducationMichigan Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Trentadue v. Buckler Automatic Lawn Sprinkler CompanyMichigan Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation v. Nestlé Waters North America IncMichigan Supreme Court · 2007
  4. William Miller v. Allstate Ins CoMichigan Supreme Court · 2008
  5. Martin v. Secretary of StateMichigan Court of Appeals · 2008

31 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