People ex rel. Bishop v. Walker

9 Mich. 328, 1861 Mich. LEXIS 37
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 6, 1861
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 9 Mich. 328 (People ex rel. Bishop v. Walker) 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
People ex rel. Bishop v. Walker, 9 Mich. 328, 1861 Mich. LEXIS 37 (Mich. 1861).

Opinions

Martin Ch. J.:

While in the absence, of any statutory provision to that effect, a corporator may, at the common law, have a mandamus to compel the cusios of corporate records and documents to allow him an inspection of them, yet to entitle himself to the aid of the court, he must show that he has made a proper demand upon the custos, at a proper time and place, and for a proper reason, and has been refused. I have examined all the cases to which we have been referred, and can find none where the writ was granted to enable a corporator to gratify idle curiosity. The principle seems to be, and very properly too, that the party asking the writ must have some interest at stake which renders the inspection necessary.

[331]*331No such case is made by this relator; nor has he any remedy under the statute (Comp. L. §1915) which provides that plank road companies shall keep a stock book, which shall be open at the office of the corporation during business hours, for the inspection of all persons — for he makes no case under it. He asks for an inspection of all the books, records and papers of the company; which is a demand not within the statute; and he shows no demand made at the office of the company in business hours for inspection of its books, nor does he give any excuse or reason why such demand was not or could not be made Had he the statutory right to make the broad demand which was made in this case, he has not made it under circumstances which entitle him to the remedy asked.

The writ is refused.

Manning and Campbell JJ. concurred.

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

Related

North Oakland County Board of Realtors v. Realcomp, Inc
572 N.W.2d 240 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1998)
Republican Party v. State Ex Rel. Hall
400 S.W.2d 660 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1966)
Albee v. Lamson & Hubbard Corp.
69 N.E.2d 811 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1946)
Nowack v. Auditor General
219 N.W. 749 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1928)
Charles Hegewald Co. v. State Ex Rel. Hegewald
149 N.E. 170 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1925)
Venner v. Chicago City Railway Co.
152 Ill. App. 398 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1910)
Woodworth v. Old Second National Bank
117 N.W. 893 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1908)
State ex rel. Bunn v. Fisher
61 N.E. 929 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1901)
People ex rel. Mackey v. American Union Life Insurance
31 Misc. 617 (New York Supreme Court, 1900)
State ex rel. Weinberg v. Pacific Brewing & Malting Co.
58 P. 584 (Washington Supreme Court, 1899)
Matter of Steinway
53 N.E. 1103 (New York Court of Appeals, 1899)
Ellsworth v. Dorwart
63 N.W. 588 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1895)
Lake Erie & Western Railroad v. State, ex rel. Mushlitz
38 N.E. 596 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1894)
State ex rel. Spinney v. Sportsman's Park & Club Ass'n
29 Mo. App. 326 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1888)
Stettauer v. New York & Scranton Construction Co.
42 N.J. Eq. 46 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1886)
State ex rel. Tutton v. Eberhardt
14 Neb. 201 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1883)
Brewer v. Watson
71 Ala. 299 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1882)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 Mich. 328, 1861 Mich. LEXIS 37, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-bishop-v-walker-mich-1861.