Legal Opinion
City of Lansing v. Edward Rose Realty, Inc.
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided July 2, 1993No. Docket Nos. 93256, 93257, (Calendar No. 10)PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRiley, J.
In this case we are asked to review a city ordinance providing for mandatory access to private property by the grantee of a city franchise for provision of cable television services. We hold the ordinance to be unreasonable and beyond the authority of the city to exercise the power of eminent domain.
i
In April 1974, the City of Lansing entered into a franchise agreement with Continental Cablevision, Inc., providing Continental with the nonexclusive right to operate its cable system in the City of Lansing. This agreement was amended several times and is currently in effect until the year 2004.…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Berman v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Hawaii Housing Authority v. MidkiffSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Cincinnati v. VesterSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- City of Cincinnati v. Vester. Same v. Richards Same v. ReakirtSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Wayne County v. HathcockMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
- Debano-Griffin v. Lake CountyMichigan Supreme Court · 2013
- Beulah Hoagland Appleton Qualified Personal Residence Trust v. Emmet County Road CommissionMichigan Court of Appeals · 1999
- Detroit International Bridge Co. v. Commodities Export Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 2008
- Amsat Cable Ltd. v. Cablevision of Connecticut Ltd. PartnershipCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.