Stoll v. Padley
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Muskegon. (Dickerman, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiffs bring error. Keversed, and justice's judgment affirmed.' The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Montgomery, J
The plaintiffs recovered a judgment against the defendants in justice's court, which, on being removed by certiorari, was reversed. We are called .upon to examine the several grounds of error alleged in the court below.
1. It is alleged that the justice failed to obtain jurisdiction, for the reason that the suit was commenced by a short summons, which did not show on its face why a long summons was not employed. The statute does not require any such recitation. See Allen v. Mills, 26 Mich. 123. If the facts had not been such as to justify the use of a short summons, the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Brady v. TaberMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
- Allen v. MillsMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
- Gray v. WillcoxMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- Stadler v. MoorsMichigan Supreme Court · 1861
- Sherman v. KilpatrickMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
3Cited by6 opinions
- First Nat. Bank of Mill Creek v. EllisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Forbes Lithograph Manufacturing Co. v. WinterMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Foster v. WatsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
- Hawkins v. CastenholzMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
- Anderson & Son v. HjerrildSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.