Horton v. City of Kalamazoo
Michigan Court of Appeals
1Per curiam
Defendant city, through its city commission, furnished legal counsel to defendant Fouts, a city police officer, and agreed to pay his costs in three actions brought by Fouts in the name of the state under the padlock law, MCLA 600.3805; MSA 27A.3805, to abate public nuisances. Plaintiff sued to enjoin the providing of funds and services, sought restitution and an accounting. The trial court held that the expenditures were for a public purpose. From its grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants, plaintiff appeals.
The Michigan Constitution forbids a city to loan its credit for a…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- People ex rel. Detroit & Howell Railroad v. Township BoardMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
- City of Gaylord v. Gaylord City ClerkMichigan Supreme Court · 1966
- Hays v. City of KalamazooMichigan Supreme Court · 1947
- Skutt v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
- Three Lakes Ass'n v. WhitingMichigan Court of Appeals · 1977
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hess v. Cannon TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2005
- City of Lansing v. Edward Rose Realty, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1993
- City of Bay City v. Bay County TreasurerMichigan Court of Appeals · 2011
- City of Lansing v. Edward Rose Realty, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1993
- Hess v. Cannon TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2005