Campau v. Board of Wayne County Auditors

164 N.W. 369, 198 Mich. 468, 1917 Mich. LEXIS 906
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided September 27, 1917·No. Calendar No. 27,797·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Ostrander, J.

Plaintiff seeks to compel the defendant to approve a plat. The court below refused the writ of mandamus. The proposed plat conforms to the streets and alleys of adjoining plats. It does not interfere with any general plan for streets. It was disapproved because plaintiff had not provided for, and would not provide for, a certain street across his land.

The governing statute is Act No. 251, Public Acts of 1915 (1 Comp. Laws 1915, § 3350 et seq.). Plaintiff [469] is entitled to an approval, and the judgment must be reversed and one entered to this effect. Campau v. Board of Public Works, 86 Mich. 372 (49 N. W. 39) ; Van Husan v. Heames, 91 Mich. 519 (52 N. W. 18); Owen v. Moreland, 132 Mich. 477 (93 N. W. 1068).

Kuhn, C. J., and Stone, Bird, Moore, Steere, Brooke, and Fellows, JJ., concurred.

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

Campau v. Board of Wayne County Auditors, 164 N.W. 369, 198 Mich. 468, 1917 Mich. LEXIS 906 (Mich. 1917).

164 N.W. 369 (Campau v. Board of Wayne County Auditors) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ridgemont Development Co. v. City of East Detroit
100 N.W.2d 301 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1960)
Tuxedo Homes, Inc. v. Green
63 So. 2d 812 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1953)
Allen v. Stockwell
178 N.W. 27 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1920)
Leonard-Hillger Land Co. v. Wayne County Board of Auditors
169 N.W. 850 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1918)