224 N.W. 624 | Mich. | 1929
We adopt the opinion of the trial judge:
"This is a quo warranto proceeding instituted by the attorney general, challenging the right of the defendant company to use the words 'Trust Company' in its name. Said defendant was incorporated under Act No.
"The first question raised is apparently determined adversely to the claim of defendant by the decision of the Supreme Court in Whitney Realty Co. v. Secretary of State,
"It has been repeatedly declared by the Supreme Court of the State that repeals by implication are not favored. Whether or not there has been such a repeal in a given instance rests on the legislative intent. If existing legislative enactments relating to a given subject-matter are revised and consolidated in the form of a general revision or code, an intent to supersede prior statutes may, as a rule, be inferred. Such principle was announced and applied in the recent case ofRay Corporation v. Secretary of State,
"No claim is made that Act No.
"As I view the situation, the conclusion is unavoidable that Act No.
"It follows that judgment must enter in the case in accordance with the prayer of the information."
Affirmed.
NORTH, C.J., and FEAD, FELLOWS, WIEST, McDONALD, and SHARPE, JJ., concurred. POTTER, J., did not sit.