Detroit, Monroe & Toledo Railroad v. City of Detroit

12 N.W. 904, 49 Mich. 47, 1882 Mich. LEXIS 484
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedJune 27, 1882
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 12 N.W. 904 (Detroit, Monroe & Toledo Railroad v. City of Detroit) 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
Detroit, Monroe & Toledo Railroad v. City of Detroit, 12 N.W. 904, 49 Mich. 47, 1882 Mich. LEXIS 484 (Mich. 1882).

Opinion

Campbell, J.

This is a certiorari to review proceedings to open Harper avenue in the city of Detroit. A number [48]*48of errors are set forth as alleged in the petition for the writ,, but we shall only refer to some matters of importance. It appears that in opening this avenue it will become necessary to cross the lands and to a greater or less extent interfere with the premises of several railroad companies, and that this* involved the principal damages. One of these — the Lake-Shore & Michigan Southern Railroad Company — was not even named in the proceedings,, although the jury awarded1damages for land taken. That company did not appear and* the taking of land and assessment of damages are invalid) absolutely. The Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Company was named and had lands taken and damages-awarded, but did not appear and was not lawfully served) with process. The service purports to have been made on its attorney. The statute has not authorized such service. The damages assessed to these two companies alone made up* a considerable sum, charged on the various parties in the-assessment district as benefited by the proposed improvement. But the assessment is void if the land is not lawfully condemned, as it has not been, and the way cannot be lawfully established. Plaintiff in certiorari appeared and objected to the proceedings seasonably, and the objections-were overruled. We think the proceedings were erroneous- and should be quashed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

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

Related

Thompson v. Town of Frostproof
103 So. 118 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1925)
City of Palmetto v. Katsch
98 So. 352 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1923)
Kansas Central Railroad v. Board of Commissioners
45 Kan. 716 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1891)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
12 N.W. 904, 49 Mich. 47, 1882 Mich. LEXIS 484, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/detroit-monroe-toledo-railroad-v-city-of-detroit-mich-1882.