Legal Opinion

Miller v. City of Detroit

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 1, 1928No. Docket No. 19, Calendar No. 33,362PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWiest, J.

In 1916, the city of Detroit annexed a subdivision in the township of Greenfield, in which two boulevards existed by dedication and acceptance. Upon such annexation the mentioned boulevards became a part of the park and boulevard system of the city. The city charter provides for a commissioner of parks and boulevards, and grants such officer power to control and manage boulevards and pave the same, the expense thereof to be borne by the city at large. After annexation, the city, by ordinance, changed the designation of the two boulevards to that of streets, and, upon petition of plaintiff…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. MacLachlan v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Albers v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1916

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Miller v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Forest Hill Cemetery Co. v. City of Ann ArborMichigan Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Oprisiu v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Salisbury v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Theisen v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1931

12 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