Legal Opinion

Plum Hollow Golf & Country Club v. Township of Southfield

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 29, 1954No. Calendar 46,150PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarr, J.

Plaintiff is the owner of land in South-field township, Oakland county, Michigan, on which it maintains a country club and operates a golf course. On the south portion of the property is a depression which the trial court determined, on the basis of somewhat conflicting testimony, to be approximately 200 feet in width by 700 feet in length and from 15 to 20 feet in depth. In 1946 defendant township adopted a zoning ordinance by which plaintiff’s land in question here was restricted to use for residential purposes. Chapter 8, section 2:F, of the ordinance authorizes the zoning board of…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. City of North Muskegon v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Long v. City of Highland ParkMichigan Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Grand Trunk Western Railroad v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Senefsky v. City of Huntington WoodsMichigan Supreme Court · 1943
  5. Hitchman v. Township of OaklandMichigan Supreme Court · 1951

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Comer v. City of DearbornMichigan Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Jamens v. Shelby TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 1972
  3. Keller v. Township of FarmingtonMichigan Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Choe v. Flint Charter TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2000
  5. Anchor Steel & Conveyor Co. v. City of DearbornMichigan Supreme Court · 1955

5 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