Legal Opinion

Hagar v. Coup

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 18, 1883PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Error to Superior Court of Detroit. Assumpsit. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMarston, J.

¥e are of opinion that under the Act of 1879 and the case of Bagley v. Pridgeon 42 Mich. 551, residence of at least one of the parties in the city of Detroit is essential to confer jurisdiction upon the Superior Court, and that the parties cannot confer jurisdiction where none is given by the statute. Any other view would enable parties, if so disposed, to submit to and bring into that court all classes of personal actions from any part of the State.-

If the appellees disputed the right of counsel to sue out *56the writ of error in this case, they should on motion and a proper showing have moved…

2Cited by12 opinions

  1. Anderson v. RitterbuschSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
  2. County of Redwood v. Winona & St. Peter Land Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
  3. Erickson v. Cass CountyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1903
  4. Edwards v. CooperIndiana Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Farr v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1904

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

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

Powered by the Exa API