Dillon v. Howe
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Muskegon. (Dickerman, J.) Attachment proceedings under the logdien law. Defendant Sullivan .Lumber Company brings error. Reversed. The facts are stated in the opiniqn.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
This action was brought in 'justice’s court, under Act No. 229, Laws of 1887, to enforce a lien for work and labor in loading and skidding a lot of pine and hemlock logs.
1. Plaintiff was an infant, and process was issued without the appointment of a next friend. Defendant company insists that the court obtained no jurisdiction, because section 6864, How. Stat., provides that no process shall issue in favor of an infant plaintiff until the next friend shall be appointed. There are two answers To this objection :
a — Defendant made no objection for this reason in the justice’s court. Pistorius…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sexton v. McDowdMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- Parks v. GoodwinMichigan Supreme Court · 1843
- Stevens v. OsmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1848
- Gray v. WillcoxMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- Pingree v. SteereMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Durrell v. RichardsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- Graham v. NippressMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
- Baroda State Bank v. PeckMichigan Supreme Court · 1926
- Becherl v. PlutchakMichigan Supreme Court · 1912