People ex rel. Fitzgerald v. Whipple

Michigan Supreme Court

People ex rel. Fitzgerald v. Whipple

49 N.W. 922, 41 Mich. 548

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 8, 1879

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 49 N.W. 922 (People ex rel. Fitzgerald v. Whipple) 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. Fitzgerald v. Whipple, 49 N.W. 922, 41 Mich. 548 (Mich. 1879).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

A mandamus would be entirely inefficient in reaching the mischief complained of, as no court by such means could keep up a continuous or repeated attendance. Courts are not created to conduct the municipal affairs of cities, and nothing short of any such.general supervision would reach such cases as the present. The remedy, if there is one, is not judicial. .This is not a case where there is some specific right involved, but is a general violation of public duty.

Mandamus denied.

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

Per Curiam.

A mandamus would be entirely inefficient in reaching the mischief complained of, as no court by such means could keep up a continuous or repeated attendance. Courts are not created to conduct the municipal affairs of cities, and nothing short of any such.general supervision would reach such cases as the present. The remedy, if there is one, is not judicial. .This is not a case where there is some specific right involved, but is a general violation of public duty.

Mandamus denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 N.W. 922, 41 Mich. 548, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-fitzgerald-v-whipple-mich-1879.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack