Conely v. Butler
This text of 1 McGrath 1639 (Conely v. Butler) 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.
Opinion
To compel completion of drain.
Order'to show cause denied May 11, 1892.
It appeared that petitioner had been drain commissioner and had instituted proceedings for the construction of a drain, and after the work had been let, and a portion of the drain constructed, a bill had been filed and a temporary injunction obtained, which, upon hearing, was made permanent, restraining the further prosecution of the work.
Despondent succeeded to the office. Petitioner contended that because a part of the drain had been constructed it is the duty of the present commissioner to "relay, re-establish and reassess” it, while respondent’s contention is, that he must institute a new proceeding.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 McGrath 1639, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conely-v-butler-mich-1892.