Chilson v. Jennison
Michigan Supreme Court
"Mandamus. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Per curiam
Chilson was defendant in a replevin suit commenced before a justice. He pleaded to the jurisdiction that the value of the property claimed was $200, and that, therefore, the justice had no jurisdiction. Issue in fact seems to have been taken on this plea, and testimony heard; but afterwards the justice overruled it, and Chilson refused to plead further. Plaintiff finally recovered judgment Upon special appeal the respondent refused to order a trial upon the plea to the jurisdiction, and mandamus is asked to require -him to do so.
In Henderson v. Desborough, 28 Mich. 170, it was held that when…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Henderson v. DesboroughMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
3Cited by4 opinions
- Bates & Co. v. StanleyNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
- Burt v. AddisonMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Kaufman v. KelleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
- Ware v. Shoemaker-Bale Auto Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1928