Harris v. Deitrich
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal in Chancery from Saginaw Circuit. This was a foreclosure bill which was filed March 1,1870. The subpoena was returned personally served on the defendant, March 12, 1870. The defendant did not appear. Complainant’s solicitor having died, another was substituted as his solicitor.
Read the full summary
Appeal in Chancery from Saginaw Circuit. This was a foreclosure bill which was filed March 1,1870. The subpoena was returned personally served on the defendant, March 12, 1870. The defendant did not appear. Complainant’s solicitor having died, another was substituted as his solicitor. An amended bill was thereupon filed on November 23, 3870, adding an averment not contained in the original bill, of a covenant to pay a solicitor’s fee of one hundred dollars in case of foreclosure. On the same day an order pro confesso was taken. A decree of foreclosure was granted, and a sale of the premises…
1Opinion of the Court
The Court
held, without passing upon the disputed questions of fact, that the taking a pro confesso on the same day the amended bill was filed, adding a new and material averment, without serving new process, was irregular, and that the application to open the decree and for a rehearing should have been granted.
Order reversed, with costs, and cause remanded for further proceedings.
2Cited by6 opinions
- Mickle v. MaxfieldMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Matek v. MatekMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945
- Wayne Creamery v. SuyakMichigan Court of Appeals · 1968
- Commercial National Bank v. GauklerMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
- Perkins v. PerkinsMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.