Ireland v. Woolman
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal in Chancery from Cass Circuit. This was a bill to foreclose a mortgage. The case was heard on the pleadings and proofs, and a decree was made in favor of complainant. The defendants appealed. The objections to the decree are stated in the opinion. The decree is erroneous. 1. Because complainant furnished no affidavit of regularity of proceedings. That there is none returned is certain.
Read the full summary
Appeal in Chancery from Cass Circuit. This was a bill to foreclose a mortgage. The case was heard on the pleadings and proofs, and a decree was made in favor of complainant. The defendants appealed. The objections to the decree are stated in the opinion. The decree is erroneous. 1. Because complainant furnished no affidavit of regularity of proceedings. That there is none returned is certain. The recital in the decree that such an affidavit was furnished, is no proof of the fact. —10 Mich. 265; 6 Id. 401. The decree can not be sustained without such an affidavit.— Chancery Rules, 92. 2. No…
1Opinion of the Court
Cooley J.
Several objections are taken by the appellants to the decree in this cause, but none of them, we think, well founded.
1. It is objected that no affidavit of the regularity of the proceedings as to the defaulted defendants was presented at the hearing. It is always proper that such an affidavit should be presented, and the rule — Chancery Rule, 92 — requires that either in that form, or some other, evidence should be furnished of the regularity of the steps to take the bill as confessed; but this is for the convenience of the judge only, and while the affidavit could not make the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Austin v. AustinMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
- McVeigh v. SherwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1882