Legal Opinion · Dissent

County of Bay ex rel. Houghtaling v. Brock

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 16, 1880Published

Error to Bay. Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error.

1DissentGraves, J.

I agree with the circuit judge that the declaration shows no cause of action. The law *50cannot be changed by the'mode of entitling the cause, or by the fashioning of the declaration. The defendant Brock was elected sheriff and gave a bond, with the other defendants as sureties, for the discharge of his duties in a proper manner. It was framed in accordance with the statute (Comp. L. §§ 550-1) in all respects, except that in place of being made to “ the people of this State,” it was drawn and executed as running to “ the county of Bay.” It was approved in the same manner by the board of…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Dugan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1818
  2. Clay Fire & Marine Insurance v. Huron Salt & Lumber Manufacturing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1875
  3. Forrest v. O'DonnellMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
  4. Johr v. Board of SupervisorsMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
  5. Lyell v. Lapeer CountyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Michigan · 1855

7 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