Legal Opinion

Chapman v. Detroit Metropolitan Corp.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 18, 1934No. Calendar 37,934, 37,935, 37,936PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWiest, J.

The principal defendant in three garnishment suits moved the circuit court to dismiss the writs for noncompliance with a statutory requirement and, upon denial of the motion, reviews by appeal in the nature of certiorari.

Affidavits for the writs averred that the principal defendant' was indebted to plaintiffs in sums not exceeding stated amounts. The statute," 3- Comp. Laws.; 1929,. § 14857, requires the affidavit.", for writ of garnishment to state that the principal defendant is indebted to plaintiff “in a given amount.”

The point is made that the affidavits did not state given amounts.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People's Wayne County Bank v. StottMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
  2. United Collieries, Inc. v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1933

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Dinius v. BolibrzuchMichigan Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Robert W. Irwin Co. v. Sterling, Inc.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 1953
  3. Met-Wood Products Corp. v. Sparks-Withington Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1947

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API