George v. Wyandotte Electric Light Co.

• Decision Date: 16 April 1895
• Citation: 62 N.W. 985,105 Mich. 1
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: GEORGE ET AL. v. WYANDOTTE ELECTRIC LIGHT CO. ET AL. CAMPBELL ET AL. v. CITY OF WYANDOTTE ET AL.

62 N.W. 985

105 Mich. 1

GEORGE ET AL. v. WYANDOTTE ELECTRIC LIGHT CO. ET AL.

CAMPBELL ET AL. v. CITY OF WYANDOTTE ET AL.

Supreme Court of Michigan

April 16, 1895

Appeal from circuit court, Wayne county, in chancery; George Gartner, Judge.

Separate actions by Louis George and others against the Wyandotte Electric Light Company and others, and by William Campbell and others against the city of Wyandotte and others.

The two cases were heard together in the lower court, and decree in each entered for the plaintiffs. From the decree in the first case the defendant Wyandotte Electric Light Company appeals and from a part of the decree in the second case plaintiffs appeal. Decree in second case affirmed, and decree in first case modified and affirmed.

Edwin F. Conely and Orla B. Taylor, for appellants.

Dickinson Thurber & Stevenson, Charles B. Warren, and Charles W Casgrain, for appellees.

LONG J.

These cases were heard together in the Wayne circuit court in chancery, and are each here on appeal. We shall refer to them as the "George case" and the "Campbell case." The pleadings in each case are here, but there is but one record, which substantially contains all the testimony in reference to each case. The cases involve the validity of two contracts made by the city of Wyandotte, one with the Western Electric Company, of Chicago, for the construction of an electric light plant for the city, and the other with the Wyandotte Electric Light Company for lighting the city for the period of five years. It appears that in 1891 the Wyandotte Electric Light Company, a local company was engaged in lighting the city under a contract which would expire February 1, 1893. Prior to the last-named date, such proceedings had been had that a contract was let by the city to the Western Electric Company to build for it a plant of its own for the sum of $14,785, one-half to be paid on delivery of the apparatus on the ground. The mayor and city clerk were directed by resolution of the council to issue bonds of the city for the sum of $12,000. These bonds were issued and sold, and the proceeds directed to be deposited with the city treasurer, and on February 20, 1893, the city treasurer paid to the Western Electric Company the sum of $5,961.50. On March 1, 1893, the council declared all the proceedings to have a plant built irregular and void, and by resolution vacated and set aside such proceedings, and accepted a bid from the Wyandotte Electric Light Company to light the city for five years from that time. The bill is filed in the George case by Mr. George and some 20 or more others, taxpayers and electors of the city of Wyandotte, against the Wyandotte Electric Light Company and the mayor, clerk, and treasurer, and aldermen of the city of Wyandotte, to restrain them from carrying out the contract with the Wyandotte Electric Light Company, and to restrain the payment of any money thereunder, and that the officers and the common council of the city be directed to recognize the contract executed with the Western Electric Company as legal and in full force, and to audit, allow, and pay all moneys due under said contract according to its terms. The Wyandotte Electric Light Company and the other defendants answered, setting up that the contract with the Western Electric Company was void, and that the contract with the Wyandotte Electric Light Company was a valid and binding one upon the city and its officers. In the Campbell case, the bill is filed by Mr. Campbell and others, residents, citizens, and taxpayers of the city, against the city of Wyandotte, the mayor, clerk, and treasurer, and aldermen, and the Western Electric Company. This second bill sets up the regularity of the proceedings to the making of the contract with the Wyandotte Electric Light Company, and asks to have that contract enforced; and also asks to have the contract with the Western Electric Company declared void by reason of certain irregularities and illegal proceedings on the part of the city council and the proceedings of the freeholders' meeting by which the council was authorized to bond the city to raise money for building the plant. An injunction is asked restraining the Western Electric Company from completing the plant, and restraining the officers of the city from paying any more money to it for that purpose, and that the Western Electric Company and the officers of the city account to the city for the moneys the Western Electric Company has already received. The city and the Western Electric Company answered. The causes being at issue, the testimony was taken in open court, and a decree entered in each cause. In the George case the court decreed, substantially, that the officers of the city refrain from paying any more money to the Western Electric Company, and declared that contract void. In the Campbell case the court declared the contract of the Wyandotte Electric Light Company void, and also directed that the city refrain from paying any more moneys thereunder. It was further provided in that decree as follows: "That this decree shall be without prejudice to the rights of the city of Wyandotte or the Western Electric Co. to bring suit against the other in relation to the purchase money of said electric light plant, or the money heretofore paid to such Western Electric Co. on account of said pretended contract." From this decree in the George case the defendant the Wyandotte Electric Light Company appeals. In the Campbell case the complainant appeals. The Western Electric Company and the city do not appeal.

The only contention in the Campbell case is that the court, in declaring the contract of the Western Electric Company void should have compelled that company and the mayor, clerk, and treasurer of the city to enter into an accounting with the city for the moneys the Western Electric Company had received from the officers of the city illegally, and that the Western Electric Company and the mayor, clerk, and treasurer of the city pay over any money found due the city on such accounting; and that the court was in error in remitting the parties to their action at law. We shall consider this subject first. In this case the complainants pray that the money be repaid into the treasury, in order that the money may be a fund to meet the bonds when due, if valid by reason of being in the hands of bona fide purchasers, or otherwise. The court below found the contract between the city and the Western Electric Company void, and the city officers and the Western Electric Company have not appealed. The complainant in that case, however, does appeal, upon the ground that the court should have awarded an accounting between the city and the Western Electric Company. The only question, therefore, which we need consider on this appeal, is whether...