Case Name: The People vs. Peter Navarre
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1870-10
Citations: 2 Mich. N.P. R. 24
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People vs. Peter Navarre.
Judges: 
Reporter: The Michigan Nisi Prius Reports
Volume: 2
Pages: 24–24

Head Matter:
The People vs. Peter Navarre.
Iu prospcutions for liromlties under tlie statute for ohstruetmg liiglrwoy», (Comp. Zams, Ch. 21. Sec. 1, and Ch. 24, Sec. 5.) The People can only appear by some public officer designated b$ law, and not by private persons or attorneys.
Error to Wayne Circuit.

Opinion:
Opinion by
Graves, J.
Defendant in error was prosecuted before a Justice of the Peace, in the name of the People, to recover certain penalties claimed to have been incurred by him under the statute against obstructing highways, (Comp. L., Ch. 23,/Sec. 1,) and the'statute protecting bridges from injury, {Comp. L., Ch. 24, Sec. 5,) and the Justice rendered damages against him for $12 damages, and $10 costs of suit, and an appeal was taken to the Court below, where the cause was discontinued by oral consent in open Court, and subsequently judgment was awarded against plaintiffs in error and Joseph Loranger, their security, which were taxed at $77 25, and execution ordered to issue against plaintiffs and said Loranger for that sum. The only evidence of Loranger's connection with the case is found in' this award of judgment. The writ of error appears to have been sued out in the name of the People only, and the assignments of error purport to be by them alone. Loranger does not appear to be a party to the record in this Court.— Neither the Proseenting Attorney nor the Attorney General is named as attorney for the People, and these proceedings appear to have been conducted by other counsel.
Hold, that the People can only appear in this class of cases by some public officer designated by law. They cannot be placed in the attitude of litigants in Court at the will and by the action of private persons or attorneys. Plaintiffs in error are not legally in Court at all. The writ pf error was improvidently issued and must be dismissed.