Wattles ex rel. Johnson v. Upjohn
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kalamazoo; Root (Jesse H.), J., presiding. Quo warranto• by Stephen H. Watties, prosecuting attorney, on the relation of William H. Johnson, against William E. Upjohn and others to try the title to the offices of commissioners of the city of Kalamazoo. Judgment of ouster. Defendants bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtSteere, J.
The primary purpose of this proceeding, as emphasized in the arguments and briefs of counsel, is to test the validity of the voting system for electing members of the governing body of the city of Kalamazoo-under a recently adopted charter. The motives, which are somewhat discussed we regard as wholly immaterial. The controversy was brought before the circuit court of Kalamazoo county by an information in the nature of quo warranto filed, by the prosecuting attorney on the relation of one Johnson, an alderman of the city under its preceding charter, *516against the mayor and commissioners elected…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Maynard v. Board of CanvassersMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Brown v. SmallwoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- People ex rel. Finnegan v. MaywormMichigan Supreme Court · 1858
- Attorney General ex rel. Hooper v. LoomisMichigan Supreme Court · 1905
- Osterhous ex rel. Vander Veen v. Van DurenMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Moore v. Election CommissionersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941
- Johnson v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
- People v. ElkusCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
- Burton Drywall, Inc. v. KaufmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1978
- Layle v. ADJUTANT GEN. OF MICH.Michigan Supreme Court · 1971
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.