Cohn v. County of Oakland

3 Citing cases

  1. Cohn v. County of Oakland

    355 Mich. 610 (Mich. 1958)   Cited 1 times

    Affirmed by an equally divided court. See 354 Mich. 180. Opinion on application for reconsideration of denial of rehearing filed by 4 members of the Court. See CL 1948, § 601.26 (Stat Ann § 27.46). — REPORTER.

  2. City of Detroit v. State of Mich

    803 F.2d 1411 (6th Cir. 1986)   Cited 6 times
    In Detroit Water Sewage Dep't v Michigan, 803 F.2d 1411 (CA 6, 1986), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals utilized this proportionality test in a case bearing pertinent similarities to the facts here.

    There can be no question that the construction and improvement of a sewage disposal system is essential to the public health, safety, and welfare. See Cohn v. County of Oakland, 354 Mich. 180, 92 N.W.2d 502, 507 (1958) ("The sewage disposal system is a project designed for the protection of the public health, and as such is within the scope of the police power."); see also New Orleans Gas Light Co. v. Drainage Comm'n, 197 U.S. 453, 460, 25 S.Ct. 471, 473, 49 L.Ed. 831 (1905) ("The drainage of a city in the interest of the public health and welfare is one of the most important purposes for which the police power can be exercised."). Although no Michigan case has addressed the precise issue involved here, the Michigan Supreme Court has recognized that no municipality has the right to the use of another municipality's sewage disposal system without paying for it.

  3. Yurek v. Sterling Heights

    37 Mich. App. 386 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971)   Cited 1 times

    (p 527.) Also, see Cohn v. Oakland (1958), 354 Mich. 180, 185. Where municipalities engage in authorized activities for public purposes, courts will not interfere with discretionary acts of municipal officers in the absence of malicious intent, arbitrary action, or corrupt conduct.