Legal Opinion

Fisher v. Smith

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 6, 1932No. Calendar 35,888PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWiest, J.

This appeal, in the nature of mandamus, brings to decision the question of the right of plaintiff to' have an examination of defendant under Court Rule No. 41, upon taking* out a summons in an action for tort, and before filing a declaration.

The rule provides:

“Section 1. Any party to an action or suit may cause to be taken by deposition according to the practice regulating the taking of depositions, at any time after action commenced and before' trial, the testimony of any other party, or any person who has verified a pleading of another party, which is material and necessary in the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Shaw v. Samley Realty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
  2. Middleton v. BoardmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1924
  3. Schonhous v. WeinerNew York Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Smith v. . WoodingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
  5. Noble v. Copake Lake Pure Ice & Water CorpNew York Supreme Court · 1927

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Zoski v. GainesMichigan Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Hallett v. Michigan Consolidated Gas Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Vincent v. Van BlooysMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Bartenbach v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Neumann v. GorakWisconsin Supreme Court · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API