Legal Opinion
Smith v. Aplin
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided April 18, 1890PublishedCited by 12 opinions
Mandamus. Relator applied ior mandamus to compel respondent to Issue a warrant on the State treasury for $100, claimed to be due him as “war bounty” under Act No. 23, Laws of 1864. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, C. J.
The relator applies for a mandamus to compel the Auditor General to issue to him a warrant upon the State Treasurer for $100 bounty money to which he is entitled under the laws of the State of Michigan.
In his application for the writ the relator states that he was a private in Company H, Twenty-third Regiment of Michigan Infantry Volunteers, and mentioned in the certified copy of the certificate of the Quartermaster General, S. B. Daboll, as follows:
“ Quartermaster G eneral’s Office,
“Lansing, Mich., Jan. 24, 1889.
“I hereby certify that, as certified to this office by the Adjutant General of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People ex rel. East Saginaw Salt Manufacturing Co. v. Board of State AuditorsMichigan Supreme Court · 1861
- People ex rel. Lomane v. HammondMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
3Cited by12 opinions
- Trotzier v. McElroySupreme Court of Georgia · 1936
- Attorney General v. ConnollyMichigan Supreme Court · 1916
- McRae v. Auditor GeneralMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
- Carter v. CollinsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
- Niles Bryant School of Piano Tuning v. BaileyMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.