Legal Opinion

Mifflinburg Bank v. Bickhart

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 19, 1923No. Docket No. 96PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.

The trial judge granted, unconditionally, defendants’ motion for a new trial. Plaintiff seeks review on writ of error.

The unconditional granting of a motion for a new trial may not be reviewed on writ of error. See Decker v. Fair, 222 Mich. 507; Carton v. Day, 157 Mich. 43; 3 Comp. Laws 1915, §§ 13736, 12635, and cases cited in the annotations.

The writ is dismissed, with costs to defendants.

Wiest, C. J., and Fellows, McDonald, Bird, Sharpe, Moore, and Steere, JJ., concurred.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Decker v. FairMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Carton v. DayMichigan Supreme Court · 1909

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Benmark v. SteffenMichigan Court of Appeals · 1968
  2. Wheeler v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United StatesMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Terzian v. GordonMichigan Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Terzian v. GordonMichigan Supreme Court · 1924