PAVEMENTS, SIDEWALKS, AND ELEVATED STRUCTURES
Act 246 of 1931
41.288 Installation of sidewalks and elevated structures; payment; contracts; approval.
Sec. 18.
(1) The township board of a township may install sidewalks along the sides of a highway and may install elevated structures for foot travel over highways in the township. The township board may pay for the elevated structures out of the funds of the township or purchase the elevated structures on title retaining contracts. Contracts shall not be entered into or issued for a period longer than 10 years. A highway under the jurisdiction of the director of the state transportation department or the board of county road commissioners shall not be improved under this act without the written approval of the director of the state transportation department or the board of county road commissioners.
(2) In proceedings under this section, the township board may provide that the cost of the sidewalk or elevated structure shall be paid entirely by public money and may allocate for this purpose unexpended money in the contingent fund or general fund of the township.
History: Add. 1989, Act 80, Imd. Eff. June 20, 1989
Notes of Decisions
Listanski v. Canton Charter Twp., 523 N.W.2d 229 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 10× “MCL 41.288; MSA 9.585(3) allows for ten-year contracts for installation of sidewalks and elevated structures for pedestrian traffic.”
Williams v. Redford Twp., 207 Mich. App. 801 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 3× “The court cited MCL 41.288; MSA 9.585(3) and MCL 41.288a; MSA 9.”
Williams v. Redford Twp., 533 N.W.2d 10 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995).
“The circuit court’s decision was consistent with this Court’s later decision in Listanski v Canton Twp, supra, in which a panel of this Court concluded that, in light of MCL 41.288(1); MSA 9.585(3X1), the Legislature had limited a township’s jurisdiction over sidewalks within…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 41.288(1) — 2 cases
Listanski v. Canton Charter Twp., 523 N.W.2d 229 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994).
“MCL 41.288; MSA 9.585(3) allows for ten-year contracts for installation of sidewalks and elevated structures for pedestrian traffic.”
Williams v. Redford Twp., 533 N.W.2d 10 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995).
“The circuit court’s decision was consistent with this Court’s later decision in Listanski v Canton Twp, supra, in which a panel of this Court concluded that, in light of MCL 41.288(1); MSA 9.585(3X1), the Legislature had limited a township’s jurisdiction over sidewalks within…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.