Legal Opinion · Dissent

Preston v. Preston

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 29, 1919No. Docket No. 48Published

Appeal from Newaygo; Barton, J. Bill by Nettie Preston against Shinar Preston and others -for the reformation of a deed. From a decree for plaintiff, defendants appeal.

1DissentOstrander, J.

Whatever feeling the *654physical Condition of plaintiff arouses, the case must nevertheless be determined according to applicable rules of law.

It is a novel idea that a statute, plainly intended to affect procedure only, may be used to change a settled rule of the law of contracts, to confer upon a person a legal right and interest in subject-matter where there was none before the statute was enacted. The idea is not advanced by counsel in the briefs. As mere matter of interpretation, the statute, section 10, chap. 12, Act Ño. 314, Pub. Acts 1915 (3 Comp. Laws 1915, § 12361), negatives the idea.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Knights of the Modern Maccabees v. SharpMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Signs v. Bush's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Edwards v. ThomanMichigan Supreme Court · 1915

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

Powered by the Exa API