Blodgett v. Whaley

11 N.W. 275, 47 Mich. 469, 1882 Mich. LEXIS 667
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided January 18, 1882·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Cooley, J.

The writ of certiora/ri in this case brings under review the proceedings on laying out. a highway in [470] the township of Clam Labe. On inspection the proceedings-appear to be fatally defective for two reasons:

1. The description of the proposed route is uncertain and for that reason insufficient. In all the papers it is as follows: “In the township of Clam Lake, Wexford county, Michigan, commencing three rods south of the quarter post on the east line of section ten in said township, running-nearly in a northwesterly direction, near where the travel is-now seeking to get the best route, continuing the said highway till it gets to the limits of the city of Cadillac.” No-survey appears, and no monuments except as indicated in this description. A line “ near ” a route not yet found, but-which “ travel is now seeking,” must be as uncertain a line-as ingenuity could well suggest.

2. It does not appear’ that notice of the application to layout the highway was ever given. There is no proof of notice-on file, and plaintiff in error denies having received any. The absence of proof of notice is fatal. Gray v. Commissioner of Highways 40 Mich. 165; Names v. Commissioners of Highways 30 Mich. 490.

The proceedings must be quashed.

The other Justices concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Blodgett v. Whaley, 11 N.W. 275, 47 Mich. 469, 1882 Mich. LEXIS 667 (Mich. 1882).

11 N.W. 275 (Blodgett v. Whaley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Klein v. Dudley
229 N.W.2d 831 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1975)
La Barre v. Bent
118 N.W. 6 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1908)