Ruell v. City of Alpena

66 N.W. 49, 108 Mich. 290, 1896 Mich. LEXIS 966
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided February 7, 1896·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Grant, J.

(after stating the facts). Under both the old and amended charters, the exclusive power to fix salaries was in the common council. The provisions of the ordinance, enacted under the old charter, fixing the salaries of the police officers, were not repealed by that provision of the amended charter authorizing the formation of a board of commissioners and giving it control of the police department. The council had taken no other action fixing the plaintiff’s salary, and it was therefore governed by the ordinance. Miller v. Board of Auditors, 41 Mich. 4. See, also, People v. Board of Police, 75 N. Y. 38; Kehn v. State, 93 N. Y. 294; Ryce v. City of Osage, 88 Iowa, 558.

Reversed, and new trial ordered.

The other Justices concurred.

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

Ruell v. City of Alpena, 66 N.W. 49, 108 Mich. 290, 1896 Mich. LEXIS 966 (Mich. 1896).

66 N.W. 49 (Ruell v. City of Alpena) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brown v. Department of Military Affairs
191 N.W.2d 347 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1971)
McQuaid v. Oakland County Board of County Auditors
23 N.W.2d 644 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1946)
Lee v. County of MacOmb
284 N.W. 892 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1939)
Kaminski v. Wayne County Board of Auditors
282 N.W. 902 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1938)
Drolshagen v. County of Wayne
278 N.W. 690 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1938)