Flint & Pere Marquette Railroad v. Norton
This text of 31 N.W. 134 (Flint & Pere Marquette Railroad v. Norton) 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
No question is made in this case as to the sufficiency of the petition, notice, etc.; but it is claimed that the commissioner, in proceedings to establish and lay out a highway over the right of way and track of the plaintiff in error, arbitrarily disregarded the rights of the railroad company in his assessment of damages, and failed and neglected to award it just compensation for its damages by rea- . son of the laying out of the proposed highway.
The writ of certiorari was improvidently granted, and ■must be dismissed, with costs. The statute1 has provided for an appeal from the commissioner to the township board. When the only grievance lies in the • award of damage, the proper remedy is by such appeal. “It must be presumed that, if the commissioner refused to consider the proper ^elements of damage, the board would have done justice on the appeal.” Detroit & B. C. R. R. Co. v. Graham, 46 Mich. 642.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
31 N.W. 134, 64 Mich. 248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flint-pere-marquette-railroad-v-norton-mich-1887.