Legal Opinion
Brown v. Pontiac Mining Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided July 2, 1895PublishedCited by 5 opinions
Mandamus. Relators applied for mandamus to compel' respondent to vacate an order sustaining a demurrer to a'bill in chancery. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
McGrath, C.. J:
Bills were filed in the first two; cases *655September 27, 1893, under chapter 124a, '3 How. ‘Stat, p. 3397, to wind up the affairs and distribute the assets of the defendant corporations. The bills were verified by-affidavits dated July 22, 1893. Defendants Watson and Ashley entered their appearance in February, 1894, and afterwards demurred in each case, setting forth:
“1. That the said bill is not verified as required by law.
“2. That the proceedings taken in said cause and the relief prayed for in said bill áre mot warranted or authorized by law. .
“3. That the complainants have…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Brown v. BuckMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- People ex rel. Robison v. SwiftMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- The People v. . WalkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Asheville Division No. 15 v. . AstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
- Bank of Galliopolis v. TrimbleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1846
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Floyd v. District Court of the Sixth Judicial DistrictNevada Supreme Court · 1913
- State Ex Rel. County of Musselshell v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1931
- C. H. Little Co. v. Woodward Avenue Cemetery Ass'nMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
- Harris v. DoyleMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
- Brown v. Pontiac Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1896