In re Bd. of Educ. of Detroit
| Decision Date | 04 June 1928 |
| Docket Number | No. 120.,120. |
| Citation | 219 N.W. 614,242 Mich. 658 |
| Parties | In re BOARD OF EDUCATION OF CITY OF DETROIT. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Wayne County; De Witt H. Merriam, Judge.
In the matter of the petition of the Board of Education of the City of Detroit for condemnation of private property for the use or benefit of the public. Before verdict, the Board moved to discontinue proceedings, which motion was denied, and verdict confirmed, and the Board appeals. Confirmation of verdict vacated, and case remanded, with directions.
Argued before the Entire Bench.Arthur F. Lederle, Asst. Corp. Counsel, of Detroit (Clarence E. Wilcox, Corp. Counsel, of Detroit, of counsel), for appellant.
Campbell, Bulkley & Ledyard, of Detroit (Selden S. Dickinson and William B. Cudlip, both of Detroit, of counsel), for appellees.
The Detroit city board of education, acting under power of eminent domain, declared it necessary to enlarge the Veta school site, and to take, for such purpose, certain private property. The circuit court for the county of Wayne was petitioned to summon and impanel a jury to pass upon the necessity of the taking and to fix the compensation. The jury found the necessity and awarded compensation. Believing the expense, so fixed for taking ten of the lots, not justified, the board filed a discontinuance of the proceeding against such lots, moved the court to allow the discontinuance, and permit amendment of the petition and the verdict roll by excision of the rejected lots, and also filed objections to confirmation of the verdict as to such lots. The court denied the motions and confirmed the verdict. The board appealed and here contends that petitioner had a right to discontinue the proceeding against part, or all, of the property at any time before confirmation of the verdict, and the court erred in denying such right.
The Detroit city board of education is a state agency, clothed with the power of eminent domain. Act No. 37, Public Acts 1925. As such state agency it possessed the power to launch and prosecute the proceeding in court, but was without power to discontinue the same ‘after the confirmation of the verdict of the jury.’ C. L. 1915, § 370.
That statute, in providing that discontinuance may not be made after confirmation of the verdict, is a clear recognition of the right to discontinue before confirmation of the verdict. The limitation in the statute relates to the time for the exercise of a right,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Foster v. Herley
...more than ten years, did not result in a taking of the plaintiff's property under the Michigan Constitution. In re Board of Education of City of Detroit, 242 Mich. 658, 219 N.W. 74; Anderson Trust Co. v. American Life Insurance Co., 302 Mich. 575, 5 N.W.2d 470. Since there was no passing of......
-
In re Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Auth.
...parties in interest who have appeared in said proceedings, under the order of the court.' In the case of In re Board of Education of City of Detroit, 242 Mich. 658, 219 N.W. 614, 615, a jury returned a verdict of necessity in condemnation proceedings and determined the amount of compensatio......
-
3234, Territory of Haw. v. Damon (In re Akana)
...of the verdict clearly recognizes the right of discontinuance before confirmation of the verdict. (In re Board of Education of City of Detroit, 242 Mich. 658, 219 N. W. 614) By the same reasoning, a statute which allows damages upon abandonment of a proceeding before the entry of a final ju......
-
Ford v. City of Detroit
...thereupon discontinued the proceedings. This it had a right to do prior to the confirmation of the verdict. In re Board of Education of City of Detroit, 242 Mich. 658, 219 N. W. 614. The instant case was heard in December, 1931, but the trial judge did not hand down his opinion until July, ......