TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Attorney General v. Common Council

ATTORNEY GENERAL v. COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DETROIT

Attorney Gen. v. Common Council, 113 N.W. 1107 (Mich. 1907)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Michigan Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 10, 1907
Docket
No. 53
Judges
Alva, Carpenter, Hooker, Moore, Ostrander
Citations
113 N.W. 1107150 Mich. 3101907 Mich. LEXIS 798
Disposition
Affirmed.
Headnotes
Municipal Corporations — Powers — Manufactures — Paving Brick. A city cannot engage in the manufacture of paving brick for use upon its own streets without an express grant of power, the brick being purchasable in the open market, and their manufacture therefore not being necessary to the exercise of the city’s right to pave its streets.
Summary
Appeal from Wayne; Mandell, Murphy, and Brooke, JJ. Bill by John E. Bird, attorney general, to enjoin the common council of the city of Detroit, Frances A. Blades, controller, William B. Thompson, treasurer, and Frank Reich from using a fund raised by taxation for the construction of a municipal paving-brick plant. From a decree for complainant, defendants appeal.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Hooker

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Hooker,. J.

The attorney general filed the bill in this cause to enjoin the city of Detroit from using a fund raised by tax for the purpose of paying for the construction of a municipal plant for the manufacture of brick to be used in paving, for which a contract had been made with one Frank Reich, by direction of the common council. The defendant has appealed from a decree sustaining complainant’s contention, and perpetually enjoining the payment of the fund as prayed. The only question in the case is whether the legislature has authorized. the city to make such a contract.

*311 We agree with the opinion filed in the circuit court that the power to engage in the business of brick making, is not included in the powers expressly granted to the city, and that it is neither fairly implied in, nor incident to, such powers as are expressly granted, nor is it indispensable or even essential to the declared objects and purposes of the corporation. While the law permits municipal corporations to do those things which are necessary to accomplish the objects of their creation, under an implication of power (see 1 Dillon on Municipal Corporations [4th Ed.], § 89; 8 Current Law, p. 1062), the right has not usually been held to go so far. as to permit them to engage in the manufacture of articles necessary to their lawful enterprises, where they are in common use and are to be had in the open market.

The decree is affirmed, with costs.

Me Alva y, C. J., and Carpenter, Ostrander, and Moore, JJ., concurred.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1926: 11930: 11939: 21940: 11965: 11971: 11979: 119262026peak 1939 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Borgelt v. City of Minneapolis135 N.W.2d 438 (Minn. 1965)
  2. Inch Memorials v. City of Pontiac286 N.W.2d 903 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979)
  3. City of Denton v. Denton Home Ice Co.27 S.W.2d 119 (Tex. 1930)
  4. City of Detroit v. Michigan Public Utilities Commission286 N.W. 368 (Mich. 1939)
  5. Home Owners' Loan Corp. v. City of Detroit290 N.W. 888 (Mich. 1940)
  6. Barnhart v. City of Grand Rapids211 N.W. 96 (Mich. 1926)

Most recent

  1. Inch Memorials v. City of Pontiac286 N.W.2d 903 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979)
  2. Sabaugh v. City of Dearborn185 N.W.2d 363 (Mich. 1971)
  3. Borgelt v. City of Minneapolis135 N.W.2d 438 (Minn. 1965)
  4. Home Owners' Loan Corp. v. City of Detroit290 N.W. 888 (Mich. 1940)
  5. Ottawa Lumber, Co. v. Mayor of Harbor Springs288 N.W. 552 (Mich. 1939)
  6. City of Detroit v. Michigan Public Utilities Commission286 N.W. 368 (Mich. 1939)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list