Mulligan v. City of Kalamazoo
This text of 158 N.W.2d 59 (Mulligan v. City of Kalamazoo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Plaintiffs appeal a summary judgment granted in favor of defendant.
This action was commenced to enjoin the construction of a drying lagoon and by-products solids disposal area on 250 acres in Kalamazoo township. The installation is part of a $4,000,000 project to provide secondary sewage treatment for domestic and industrial waste. Plaintiffs alleged the operation of the secondary sewage treatment plant would be a nuisance.
Defendant moved for a summary judgment under GrCR 1963, 117.2(1) on the ground that plaintiffs’ complaint did not state a claim upon which relief could be granted because injunctive relief could not be granted for speculative, conjectural or apprehensive injury or nuisance and defendant had constitutional and statutory authority to construct and operate sewage and waste disposal facilities.
The trial judge held that the installation was not a nuisance per se and that injunctive relief was not proper to enjoin a speculative nuisance. The trial judge relied upon Sommers v. City of Detroit (1938), 284 Mich 67, and Cullum v. Topps-Stillman’s, Inc. (1965), 1 Mich App 92.
Since the hearing in the trial court and the submission of the case to this Court, the project has been completed. Therefore, the question is moot.
The appeal is hereby dismissed. No costs, a public question being involved.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
158 N.W.2d 59, 9 Mich. App. 713, 1968 Mich. App. LEXIS 1523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mulligan-v-city-of-kalamazoo-michctapp-1968.