Legal Opinion

Waldron v. Palmer

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 2, 1895PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Error to Hillsdale. (Lane, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.

Plaintiff recovered in an action upon a justice’s judgment, and the defendant appealed. A number of questions are raised upon the transcript of the justice’s docket.

The docket reads:

“1887, June 7. Summons issued returnable June 17, 1887, at 9 a. m., at my office in Hillsdale city.
“June 17. Summons returned personally served on June 9, 1887, by Walter St. John, Const.; fees, 12.35. Suit called. Parties appear, and adjourn by consent to July 2, 1887, at 9 a. m., without pleading.
“July 2. Suit called at 9 a. m. Plaintiff appeared. Defendant did not appear, and after a delay of one hour, and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Mudge v. YaplesMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Roberts v. WarrenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1854
  3. Facey v. FullerMichigan Supreme Court · 1865

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. William Deering & Co. v. VenneNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Lapham v. TarabusiMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Mitts v. HarveyMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
  4. Lacomb v. GodkinMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
  5. Fitzhugh v. RivardMichigan Supreme Court · 1896

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API