PEOPLE v. DAVID ROAT. (Supreme Court. July 12, 1898.) Exceptions from Genesee circuit. This is a case wherein defendant was convicted of breaking and entering store with intent to commit larceny, and brings exceptions. Conviction affirmed. PEOPLE v. CHARLES A. SMITH. (Supreme Court. July 18, 1898.) Exceptions from Berrien circuit. Defendant in this case was convicted of keeping his saloon open on Sunday, and brings exceptions. Conviction affirmed. PEOPLE v. ADELBERT D. SWARTZ. (Supreme Court. October 3, 1898.) Error to St. Joseph circuit. Defendant was convicted of the crime of murder, and brings error. Conviction affirmed. PEOPLE v. ORSON D. TAYLOR. (Supreme Court. July 12, 1898.) Error to Saginaw circuit. This is a case wherein defendant was convicted of obtaining signature to promissory notes by means of false pretenses, and brings error. Conviction reversed. PEOPLE v. FRANK J. DETTENTHALER. (Supreme Court. December 6, 1898.) Exceptions from superior court of Grand Rapids. Above is a case wherein defendant was convicted of selling oleomargarine contrary to law, and appeals. Judgment reversed. PEOPLE v. HARVEY HILLARD. (Supreme Court. December 13, 1898.) Appeal from Van Buren circuit. This is a case where defendant was convicted of selling beer to be used as a beverage, and he appeals. Affirmed. PEOPLE v. ALBERT MALSCH. (Supreme Court. December 28, 1898.) Exceptions from Berrien circuit. This is a case wherein defendant was convicted of abandoning his wife withou support, and excepts. Affirmed. PEOPLE v. CLARENCE PHILLIPS. (Supreme Court. December 6, 1898.) Error to Ingham circuit. Above is a case wherein defendant was convicted of forgery, and brings error. PEOPLE v. EARL SCHOONMAKER. (Supreme Court. January 20, 1899.) Exceptions from Emmet circuit court. This is a case wherein defendant was convicted of rape, and excepts. Affirmed. PEOPLE v. GEORGE WILLIAMS. (Supreme Court. December 6, 1898.) Error to superior court of Grand Rapids. This is a case wherein defendant was convicted of assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder, and appeals. Judgment affirmed. PEOPLE v. WORDEN GROCERY CO. (Supreme Court. December 6, 1898.) Exceptions from Kent circuit. This is a case wherein the defendant company was convicted of selling vinegar below the required standard, and excepts. Affirmed. PEOPLE v. JOHN P. FERGUSON. Error to Barry circuit. (Supreme Court. February 21, 1899.) This is a case wherein defendant John P. Ferguson was convicted of malicious injury to property, and brings error. Affirmed. PEOPLE v. AUGUSTUS C. MENDENHALL. (Supreme Court. February 21, 1899.) Error to Jackson circuit. The defendant was convicted of bigamy, and brings error. Affirmed. PEOPLE v. CORNELIUS BLOM, SR. Error to Ottawa circuit. (Supreme Court. April 18, 1899.) This is a case wherein defendant was convicted of violation of city ordinance relative to sale of liquors, and brings error. Conviction affirmed by supreme court. PEOPLE v. DANIEL BRILL. (Supreme Court. April 18, 1899.) Certiorari to recorder's court of Detroit. This is a case wherein defendant was convicted of selling unwholesome meat, and brings certiorari. Conviction reversed by supreme court. PEOPLE v. REIGEL. (Supreme Court. April 25, 1899.) Exceptions from Bay circuit. The above is a case wherein defendant Michael Reigel was convicted of embezzlement, and appeals. Case reversed by supreme court and defendant discharged. PEOPLE v. MCBRIDE. (Supreme Court. May 9, 1899.) Exceptions from superior court of Grand Rapids. This is a case wherein defendant was convicted of embezzlement, and brings exceptions. The supreme court set the conviction aside and ordered a new trial. PEOPLE v. JONES ET AL. (Supreme Court. May 27, 1899.) Error to circuit court of the county of Berrien. This is a case in which information was brought in the name of the people against Lorenzo Jones and Andrew Goines. Defendants bring error from a judgment of conviction. Case reversed. PEOPLE v. LONGWELL. (Supreme Court. June 5, 1899.) Exceptions from circuit court, Van Buren county. The defendant in this case was convicted of unlawfully selling liquor, and brings exceptions. Affirmed. PEOPLE v. TIMOTHY TALBOT. (Supreme Court. June 28, 1899.) Error to the circuit court of Berrien county. The defendant Timothy Talbot was convicted of keeping a saloon open on Sunday, and brought error. Lower court affirmed. CRIMINAL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPREME COURT. People v. Jack Cannon, alias Collins. People v. Albert Culver. People v. Kryn Linthout. People v. Edward Vanderveen. People v. Edward Fee. People v. Erasmus Bennett. People v. John M. Higgins. FOLLOWING IS LIST OF CRIMINAL CASE SUBMITTED TO THE SUPREME COURT, BUT NOT YET DECIDED. People v. Michael Maloney. People v. Edward Townsend. People v. Willis F. Tracy. People v. Otto L. Luttermoser. SCHEDULE C. This schedule contains a list of mandamus cases, certiorari and other proceedings, commenced by the Attorney General in behalf of the State. or commenced by other parties in which the State was directly interested. Attorney General Maynard v. Fort St. Union Depot Co.-Mandamus. Writ issued. This is a proceeding wherein the relator requests a writ of mandamus to compel the respondent to aid in the maintenance and repair of a viaduct over certain streets in Detroit. Under Howell's Annotated Statutes, section 3301, empowering the Railroad Commissioner to direct a railroad company to erect and maintain a bridge such as the public safety may demand, and providing that, if it is to be erected at a crossing of two railroads, the expense shall be borne by them jointly, an order directing two railroad companies to erect a viaduct over a crossing which it found to be dangerous, in order to secure the safety of persons obliged to pass over it, charges such companies with the duties and expense of maintaining the same, notwithstanding the viaduct to be used for a highway without provision in such order as to the duty of maintenance. (See 76 N. W. 85.) Fort St. Union Depot Co. v. Wesselius, Commissioner of Railroads.-Mandamus. Writ denied. This is a proceeding wherein the question is raised as to whether or not Act 228 of the Laws of 1897, in so far as it provides for the taxation of union depot companies, is valid. The relator, the Fort Street Union Depot Company. is a corporation organized under an act to authorize the incorporation of companies for the construction of union railroad stations and depots, with the necessary connecting tracks, and the management of the same. Relator's taxes were computed under Section 3 of Act 228 of 1897. It is claimed by relator that it is not included in the title of the act in question, and that consequently the provisions therein applying to it are void under section 30 of article 4 of the constitution of Michigan. The important question involved being: Is the title to the amended act, No. 228, of the Laws of 1897, broad enough to include union depots? The supreme court denied the writ of relator. (Reported in 76 N. W. 631.) Manistee & N. E. R. R. Co. v. Wesselius, Commissioner of Railroads.-Mandamus. Writ granted. This is a proceeding on the relation of the relator, the Manistee & Northeastern Railroad Company, mandamusing the Commissioner of Railroads to compel him to make out a new computation of its tax, leaving out that part of its road constructed after the passage of Act 174, Laws of 1891, providing for the taxation of railroads. |