Romatz v. Romatz
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.
Barden v. Northern Pacific R. Co., 154 US 288 (14 S Ct 1030, 38 L ed 992), provides an appropriate introduction to the ensuing confession of error. It follows (p 322):
“It is more important that the court should be right upon later and more elaborate consideration of the cases than consistent with previous declarations. Those doctrines only will eventually stand which bear the strictest examination and the test of experience.”
*84When an appellate court discovers that a majority of its members have erred, the duty of frank and corrective avowal takes first place in the order of judicial business.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Barden v. Northern Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Maier Hanson v. HansonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
- Sovereign v. SovereignMichigan Supreme Court · 1958
- Lindquist v. LindquistNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1941
- Pretlow v. PretlowSupreme Court of Virginia · 1941
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Williams v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1961
- Spoon-Shacket Co. v. County of OaklandMichigan Supreme Court · 1959
- In Re Mark T.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1967
- In Re Kinsella EstateMichigan Court of Appeals · 1982
- Fitzgerald v. BixlerMichigan Supreme Court · 1962
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.