Attorney General v. Abbott
Michigan Supreme Court
121 Mich. 540 (1899)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
Merrie Abbott (defendant), a graduate of the University of Michigan Law School, was elected to serve as prosecuting attorney in Ogemaw County, Michigan in 1898. The Michigan attorney general (plaintiff) challenged Abbott’s right to hold the office on the basis that she was a woman. The Michigan constitution was silent as to whether a woman could serve as a prosecuting attorney, and there was no statute affirmatively allowing a woman to serve in the role. The attorney general argued that because the office of prosecuting attorney was an elected position, only people eligible to vote should be permitted to serve in the role. Abbott argued that although the state constitution specified that certain offices must be held by those eligible to vote, it was silent on this matter as to the office of prosecuting attorney and therefore did not require prosecuting attorneys to be eligible to vote. She also argued that because common law did not forbid women from serving as prosecuting attorneys, she should be allowed to continue in her role.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Long, J.)
Concurrence (Hooker, J.)
Dissent (Moore, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 834,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
