Case Name: DETROIT EDISON COMPANY v. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1966-06-09
Citations: 378 Mich. 167
Docket Number: Calendar No. 1, Docket Nos. 51,237, 51,238
Parties: DETROIT EDISON COMPANY v. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY.
Judges: T. M. Kavanagh, C. J., and Dethmers, Kelly, Black, Souris, Smith, O’Hara, and Adams, JJ., concurred.
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 378
Pages: 167–168

Head Matter:
DETROIT EDISON COMPANY v. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY.
Mandamus — Refund of Tax — Redetermination of Annual Privileqe Pee.
Defendant department of treasury is ordered to proceed at once under peremptory writ with plaintiff corporation’s pending petitions for refund and pending requests for determination and redetermination of its annual franchise privilege fees for the years 1957 and 1959 through 1962 as provided by statute, there being found a clear legal duty so to proceed (CLS 1956, §§ 450.309, 450.310).
References for Points in Headnote
34 Am Jur, Mandamus § 222.
Original petition for mandamus by Detroit Edison Company, a New York corporation, to compel Raymond F. Clevenger, corporation and securities commissioner, to act upon petition for refund of overpayment of annual privilege fee for the year 1957. Petition for mandamus by same plaintiff against same defendant to compel latter to proceed with computation of annual franchise privilege fees from 1959 through 1962. Department of Treasury substituted as party defendant.
Submitted June 8, 1966.
(Calendar No. 1, Docket Nos. 51,237, 51,238.)
Writ granted June 9, 1966.
Fischer, Sprague, Franklin & Ford (Harvey T. Fischer, Richard Ford, and Gerald G. Simon, of counsel), for plaintiff.
Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Rotbert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, and T. Carl Holbrook and William D. Dexter, Assistant Attorneys General, for defendant.

Opinion:
Order oe the Court.
On Order of the Court, a peremptory writ shall issue forthwith ordering respondent to proceed at once with statutory processing of the Detroit Edison Company's pending petition for refund and the Detroit Edison Company's pending requests for determination and/or redetermination of its annual franchise privilege fees as identified in our order to show cause dated April 9, 1965.
The Court finds a clear legal duty on the part of the respondent to proceed as above under sections 9 and 10 of the statute. No other opinion to follow.
T. M. Kavanagh, C. J., and Dethmers, Kelly, Black, Souris, Smith, O'Hara, and Adams, JJ., concurred.
CLS 1956, §450.309, 450.310 (Stat Ann 1963 Rev §21.210, 21.210 [1]).—Reporter.