Michigan v. Ohio, 410 U.S. 420 (1973)
U.S. Supreme Court
Michigan v. Ohio, 410 U.S. 420 (1973)
Michigan v. Ohio
No. 30, Orig.
Argued December 11, 1972
Decided and Decree entered February 22, 1973
410 U.S. 420
Syllabus
The Special Master's recommendations fixing that portion of the Ohio-Michigan boundary running through Lake Erie adopted and decree issued.
U.S. Supreme Court
Michigan v. Ohio, 410 U.S. 420 (1973)
Michigan v. Ohio
No. 30, Orig.
Argued December 11, 1972
Decided and Decree entered February 22, 1973
410 U.S. 420
ON EXCEPTIONS TO SPECIAL MASTER'S REPORT
Syllabus
The Special Master's recommendations fixing that portion of the Ohio-Michigan boundary running through Lake Erie adopted and decree issued.
PER CURIAM AND DECREE.
Upon consideration of the Report filed Nov. 9, 1971, by Senior Judge Albert B. Maris, Special Master, exceptions filed thereto, and argument thereon, it is now ordered, adjudged, and decreed as follows:
1. The exceptions filed by the State of Michigan to the report and recommendations of the Special Master are overruled.
2. The boundary line between the States of Ohio and Michigan in Lake Erie follows a line drawn from the point in Maumee Bay where the north cape of that bay was located in 1836 on a course having a bearing North 45� East measured from a true meridian, passing over the center of the existing circular concrete seawall on Turtle Island and continuing on the same course through the
lake to the point where it intersects the boundary line between the United States and Canada.
3. In 1836, the north cape of Maumee Bay was located at the point in that bay where a line drawn North 87� 49' 44" East from Post 71 on the land boundary line between the States of Ohio and Michigan intersects a line drawn South 45� West from the center of the existing circular concrete seawall on Turtle Island, both bearings being measured from a true meridian.
4. The costs of this suit, including the expenses of the Special Master, shall be borne by the State of Michigan.
Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.
