Holden v. Board of Supervisors
Michigan Supreme Court
Mandamus, Relator applies for mandamus to compel respondents to allow Mm to sit with them as a member of the board of’ supervisors. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.
Respondents refuse to allow relator, as president of Eeed City, to act with them as a member of the board. Their objection that his election was not certified to them is frivolous. There is no question of his official position. They also rely on a supposed constitutional difficulty in the act conferring on him the powers of a member of the board of supervisors.
It was decided in Attorney General v. Preston, 56 Mich. 177 (22 N. W. Rep. 261), that it was competent for the Legislature to make the president of a village an ex officio member of the board of supervisors of his county. *204If the power…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Attorney General v. PrestonMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
3Cited by12 opinions
- Binion, Sheriff v. Oklahoma Gas Electric Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Common Council v. SchmidMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
- Detroit Board of Street Railway Commissioners v. County of WayneMichigan Court of Appeals · 1969
- City of Detroit v. Wayne Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
- Fort-Street Union Depot Co. v. Commissioner of RailroadsMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.