City of Lansing v. Lansing City Street Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

City of Lansing v. Lansing City Street Railway Co.

1 McGrath 1675, 3 Daily L.N. 41

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedApril 21, 1896

DocketNo. 15144

StatusPublished

This text of 1 McGrath 1675 (City of Lansing v. Lansing City Street Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Lansing v. Lansing City Street Railway Co., 1 McGrath 1675, 3 Daily L.N. 41 (Mich. 1896).

Pincite

Opinion

To compel respondent to repave that portion of a street lying between its tracks, and on each side of its track to the end of its ties, under the provisions of the ordinance which granted respondent's assignor the right to operate its lines.

The circuit judge granted the writ.

Affirmed April 21, 1896, with cost's.

Eespondent contended that the ordinance did not require it to repave, and insisted that mandamus is not the proper remedy.

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

To compel respondent to repave that portion of a street lying between its tracks, and on each side of its track to the end of its ties, under the provisions of the ordinance which granted respondent's assignor the right to operate its lines.

The circuit judge granted the writ.

Affirmed April 21, 1896, with cost's.

Eespondent contended that the ordinance did not require it to repave, and insisted that mandamus is not the proper remedy.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 McGrath 1675, 3 Daily L.N. 41, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-lansing-v-lansing-city-street-railway-co-mich-1896.