Cox v. Commissioner of Highways
Michigan Supreme Court
Certiorari to review proceedings laying out a highway. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtOrant, J.
Gertiorari to commissioner of highways.
The proceedings in this case are void for the following reasons:
1. The petitioners in their petition to the highway commissioner prayed for the discontinuance of one highway, for the laying out of a new highway, and for the building' of a new bridge. These objects cannot be united in one proceeding. Shue v. Highway Com’r, 41 Mich. 638.
2. The time intervening between the date of notice and the day of hearing is insufficient. The statute requires 10 full days* notice. The notice in this case was dated May 9, 1890, and the hearing fixed for May 19. Platt v.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People ex rel. Platt v. Highway CommissionerMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- Shue v. Highway CommissionerMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
3Cited by1 opinion
- La Barre v. BentMichigan Supreme Court · 1908