Case ID: mich_70/html/0413-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Champlin, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Charles E. Keefer v. The Common Council of the City of Hillsdale.
    
      Local option law.
    
    This case is ruled by the opinion In re Hauck, ante, 396.
    
      Mandamus.
    
    Argued May 1, and re-argued May 15, 1888.
    Granted May 18, 1888.
    Eelator applies for mandamus to compel respondent to approve of his bond as a retail liquor dealer. The facts are-stated In re Hauck, ante, 396, as also the points of counsel.
    
      F. A. Baker, for relator.
    
      Moses Taggart, Attorney General, G. A. Shepard, Prosecuting Attorney, and Guy M. Chester, City Attorney, for respondent.
   Champlin, J.

This case is ruled by the opinion filed In re Hauck, ante, 396.

The mandamus will issue to compel the common council to proceed under Act No. 313, Laws of 1887, in such case made and provided.

The other Justices concurred.