Attorney General v. Preston
Michigan Supreme Court
Quo warranto.
1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, J.
The following is the substance of the averments contained in the information filed in this case:
That “the village of Mackinac was reincorporated by an act of the Legislature of said State, duly approved April 1st, 1875. That section 12 of said act provides that (the president of said village, ex officio, shall be a member of the *178board of supervisors of the county of Mackinac, and he shall attend all the meetings of said board, and be entitled to vote upon all matters that may be brought before the board of supervisors, and for attending all such meetings he shall receive the same compensation…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Ogden v. SaundersSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
- People ex rel. Twitchell v. BlodgettMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
- Sears v. CottrellMichigan Supreme Court · 1858
- Scott v. Smart's ExecutorsMichigan Supreme Court · 1849
- Whallon v. Circuit Judge for Ingham CountyMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- In Re Brewster Street Housing SiteMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
- People v. Konopka (On Remand)Michigan Court of Appeals · 2015
- State ex rel. McCue v. BlaisdellNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1909
- State ex rel. Simpson v. City of MankatoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
- Peoples Wayne County Bank v. Wolverine Box Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1930
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.