Legal Opinion

Millerd v. Reeves

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1848PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to "Washtenaw Circuit Court. An action on the case was brought by Reeves in the circuit court, against the plaintiffs, in error, for flowing, by means of a dam kept up by them, the north-west quarter of section thirty, town one south of range five east, and the east half of the north-east fractional quarter of section twenty-five, in the same town, in the county of Washtenaw, of which lands the declaration alleged that Reeves was lawfully seized and possessed.

Read the full summary

Error to "Washtenaw Circuit Court. An action on the case was brought by Reeves in the circuit court, against the plaintiffs, in error, for flowing, by means of a dam kept up by them, the north-west quarter of section thirty, town one south of range five east, and the east half of the north-east fractional quarter of section twenty-five, in the same town, in the county of Washtenaw, of which lands the declaration alleged that Reeves was lawfully seized and possessed. On the trial various exceptions were taken, which, with the evidence given and that proposed to be given and rejected, bearing…

1Opinion of the Court

By the court,

Wing, J.

The motion of the plaintiffs in error, to set aside the defendant’s declaration, or the service of it, and the several motions subsequently made, though copied into the return, are not brought here by the writ of error, they being mere questions of practice. The fact that they appear in the transcript, does not give this court any power to notice them. We can only notice such matters as are properly brought up to this court by the writ of error.

We must regard the plaintiffs in error as having voluntary appeared to the action, and thereby waived all previous errors.

The…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mumford v. WhitneyNew York Supreme Court · 1836
  2. Van Rensselaer v. RadcliffNew York Supreme Court · 1833
  3. Noyes v. ChapinNew York Supreme Court · 1831
  4. Woodbury v. ParshleySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1834

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Polhemus v. Ann Arbor Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
  2. Lyle v. Cass Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Lang v. Osceola Consolidated Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1906

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API