Rice v. Hosking
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Houghton. (Hubbell, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiffs brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
Plaintiffs, as executors, brought suit upon *305two promissory notes, dated July 22, 1887, and executed by the defendant, payable to the order of Isaiah C. Watson, and by him indorsed to the order of Martha D. Watson. In the petition filed for the probate of the will, it appeared that some of the heirs of the deceased resided in Canada. Upon the filing of the petition the probate court made the usual order for the hearing under How. Stat. § 5801, and required the same to be published three weeks in a newspaper in Houghton county. The hearing was had within 60 days of the time of filing the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- O'Dell v. RogersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
- Connors v. Carp River Iron Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1884
3Cited by4 opinions
- Adams v. AdamsMichigan Supreme Court · 1943
- Norblad v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1908
- Stead v. CurtisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1913
- in Re Wendell Kratzer Revocable TrustMichigan Court of Appeals · 2019