Legal Opinion

People v. Drost

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 10, 1958No. Docket 81, Calendar 47,545PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdwards, J.

The question presented by this case is set forth thus by appellant:

“May the city of Muskegon enact and enforce an ordinance declaring that ‘Any person who drives any vehicle upon a highway without due caution and circumspection and at a speed or in a manner so as to endanger any person or property, shall be guilty of careless driving,’ when the Michigan vehicle code-has declared the same conduct to be ‘reckless driving’ and provided similar penalties therefor?”

The facts essential to our consideration have been agreed upon:

“On September 20, 1955, a complaint was filed with, and a warrant…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. HanrahanMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  2. People v. McGrawMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Surtman v. Secretary of StateMichigan Supreme Court · 1944
  4. City of Dearborn v. Sugden & Sivier, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1955

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Reed v. President of North EastCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1961
  2. Commonwealth v. CabellSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
  3. People v. VickeryMichigan Court of Appeals · 1976
  4. City of East Lansing v. YoccaMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
  5. People v. VickeryMichigan Court of Appeals · 1976

2 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