Legal Opinion

Sandenburgh v. Michigamme Oil Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 24, 1930No. Docket Nos. 140, 141, Calendar Nos. 34,655, 34,656PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Wiest, O. J.

The two cases, here consolidated, are injunction bills, in behalf of the city of Ann Arbor, and by property owners, to restrain defendant from violating a zoning ordinance, to prevent an alleged threatened nuisance, and to enforce a setback line and driveway agreement running with defendant’s title. In the circuit court the zoning ordinance was found applicable, and, for that reason, defendant was enjoined from building a gasoline filling station upon its property at the intersection of Washtenaw and South University avenues, in the city of Ann Arbor. Defendant appealed.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. City of Lansing v. DawleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Adams v. Kalamazoo Ice & Fuel Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1928

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. County of San Diego v. McClurkenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Collard v. Incorporated Village of Flower HillNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
  3. Trans-Oceanic Oil Corp. v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  4. Baylis v. CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORECourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1959
  5. Richards v. City of PontiacMichigan Supreme Court · 1943

32 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