Legal Opinion
Van Coppenolle v. City of Detroit
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided March 4, 1946No. Calendar No. 43,217PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSharpe, J.
Petitioner is the administratrix of the estate of Henry Van Coppenolle, deceased, and as such seeks a writ of mandamus requiring the city of Detroit, the commissioner of police and the city treasurer to pay to her the unpaid amounts of re-tirement moneys claimed to be due her under the city charter.
The facts are not in dispute. Petitioner’s husband, Henry Van Coppenolle, became a member of the police department of the city of Detroit in June, 1912. He retired in June, 1940. On August 7,1940, he was indicted for the crime of conspiracy to violate the gambling laws of the State of. Michigan. He…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Plunkett v. Board of Pension CommissionersSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1934
- Douglas v. Pension BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
- Walter v. Police & Fire Pension Commission of TrentonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1938
- Bader v. CroneSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1936
- People ex rel. Hardy v. GreeneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Hadden v. Consolidated Edison Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Bellomini v. State Employees' Retirement BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
- Musselman v. GovernorMichigan Supreme Court · 1995
- Advisory Opinion Re Constitutionality of 1972 PA 258Michigan Supreme Court · 1973
- Miller v. Commonwealth, State Employees' Retirement BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.