Torrans v. Hicks
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Muskegon Circuit. This was an action of ejectment brought by Torrans against Hicks. The judgment below was in favor of defendant, and plaintiff brought error.
1Opinion of the Court
Cooley, J:
The questions in this ease relate to the validity of foreclosure proceedings, under which defendant claimed title.
1. It is objected that the subpoena was not properly attested, it being- signed by a deputy of the register, instead of the register himself, and the deputy, as is claimed, not being an officer known to the law. But -if there is any thing in this, it was a mere irregularity, and does not go to the jurisdiction. And in this case the subpoena not being served is of no importance.
2. Torrans, the defendant, in the foreclosure proceedings, was proceeded against as a resident…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Shonfeld v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1942
- Morrison v. MorrisonMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
- Ruggles v. First National BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Poma v. Peoples Wayne County BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
- Carpenter v. IngersollMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.