Legal Opinion · Dissent

City of Sandusky v. Roberts

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 1, 1924No. Docket No. 152Published

1DissentFellows, J.

I am persuaded that under section 3226, 1 Comp. Laws 1915, quoted by my Brother Bird in his opinion, the city council was without jurisdiction to make this improvement costing $26,684.89 without having before it a petition signed by the owners of a majority of the land liable for assessment or without having given notice thereof through its annual appropriation bill. I think upon principle the recent case of Cooper v. City of Detroit, 222 Mich. 360, is controlling. One or the other of these things was a condition precedent to the power of the council to act, — to its jurisdiction. Nor do I…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Auditor General v. BishopMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Cooper v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Auditor General v. JohnsMichigan Supreme Court · 1916

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API