Unjian v. Unjian
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtDethmers, J.
Plaintiff filed a bill for divorce. Defendant filed an answer but. no. cross bill. At the conclusion of proofs taken thereon the court announced that plaintiff might have a decree of divorce. Before decree entered plaintiff requested that her bill of complaint be dismissed, but the court replied that she was too late. Cited in support of her claimed right to dismiss at that juncture are Coon v. Coon, 163 Mich 644; and Eisenbach v. Eisenbach, 176 Mich 354 (Ann Cas 1917A, 1197). Since, those cases were decided, Michigan Court Rule No 38, § 1, has twice been amended. Under its present provisions…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Cooper v. CooperMichigan Supreme Court · 1868
- Ritzer v. RitzerMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
- Ratcliffe v. RatcliffeMichigan Supreme Court · 1944
- Coon v. CoonMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
- Leavitt v. LeavittMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Socha v. SochaMichigan Court of Appeals · 1966
- Niskanen v. NiskanenMichigan Supreme Court · 1963
- Grober v. GroberMichigan Court of Appeals · 1969
- Niskanen v. NiskanenMichigan Supreme Court · 1963
- Wolford v. WolfordMichigan Supreme Court · 1963