Legal Opinion

People ex rel. Yates v. Attorney General

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 22, 1879PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Mandamus to compel the Attorney General to file an information in the nature of quo ivarranto against a railway corporation.

1Per curiam

One of these relators holds bonds against the Detroit & Milwaukee Bailway Co., and the other an unsatisfied judgment against the Detroit & Milwaukee Bailroad Company, a second corporation succeeding to the first. A foreclosure having been had in chancery upon mortgages made by both of these companies, one of which secured the bonds in question, (neither of these relators being personally parties or in any way represented in the purchase at the chancery sale), an arrangement was made between the Great Western Bailway of Canada and certain of the bondholders for bidding off the mortgaged…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Thrash v. LambSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911
  2. Lewright v. BellTexas Supreme Court · 1901
  3. State Ex Rel. Bennett v. Clarendon Independent School DistrictTexas Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Hermann v. Morlidge, Etc.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1944
  5. United States ex rel. Frizzell v. NewmanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1914

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