Larkin v. County of Saginaw

Michigan Supreme Court

Larkin v. County of Saginaw

11 Mich. 88, 1862 Mich. LEXIS 107

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 6, 1862

StatusPublished

Cited by20 cases

This text of 11 Mich. 88 (Larkin v. County of Saginaw) 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

Larkin v. County of Saginaw, 11 Mich. 88, 1862 Mich. LEXIS 107 (Mich. 1862).

Pincite

Opinion

Martin Ch. J.:

The Board of Supervisors of Saginaw county is clothed with legislative as well as executive power; and while the county may be made liable for its acts in the exercise of the executive, it can not for its exercise of legislative power. The determination that it was necessary to build a bridge across the Tittibawassee river, and the whole action of the Board in relation thereto, were legislative, and whether any portion was usurpation or not, no action can be maintained against the county for any consequences resulting therefrom. What would be a nuisance if erected by an individual, is not such when erected by authority of law and by the public, so as to confer a right of private action against the public therefor ; and the same principle I think controls in this case that would had the bridge ■been built by authority of the Legislature.

The judgment of the Court below is affirmed.

The other Justices concurred.

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

Martin Ch. J.:

The Board of Supervisors of Saginaw county is clothed with legislative as well as executive power; and while the county may be made liable for its acts in the exercise of the executive, it can not for its exercise of legislative power. The determination that it was necessary to build a bridge across the Tittibawassee river, and the whole action of the Board in relation thereto, were legislative, and whether any portion was usurpation or not, no action can be maintained against the county for any consequences resulting therefrom. What would be a nuisance if erected by an individual, is not such when erected by authority of law and by the public, so as to confer a right of private action against the public therefor ; and the same principle I think controls in this case that would had the bridge ■been built by authority of the Legislature.

The judgment of the Court below is affirmed.

The other Justices concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 Mich. 88, 1862 Mich. LEXIS 107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/larkin-v-county-of-saginaw-mich-1862.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack