Moore v. Cheeseman
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal in Chancery from Yan Burén Circuit. This was a bill filed by Franklin M. Moore, George Foote and George F. Bagley, copartners under the name and style of Moore, Foote & Co., against Samuel B. Cheeseman and Catharine Cheeseman.
Read the full summary
Appeal in Chancery from Yan Burén Circuit. This was a bill filed by Franklin M. Moore, George Foote and George F. Bagley, copartners under the name and style of Moore, Foote & Co., against Samuel B. Cheeseman and Catharine Cheeseman. The allegations of the bill are as follows: “That on or about the twenty-sixth day of March, A. D. 1869, one Samuel B. Cheeseman of Lawton, in said county of Yan Burén, was justly indebted unto your orators in the sum of four hundred and forty-one and twelve one-hundredths dollars, and being so indebted, the said Samuel B. Cheeseman, in order to secure to your…
1Per curiam
The bill in this case was demurred to because it was not sworn to; this apparently upon the ground that from some averments in the bill it was to be1 subjected to the rule requiring creditors’ bills to be sworn to. The court below sustained the demurrer.
We think that this was wrong. The bill does not belong to the class of statutory creditors’ bills which are required by the statute to be verified. There is no rule requiring bills in cases of general equity cognizance to be sworn to. Bills that attempt to remove into a court of. equity matters cognizable in a court of law, and bills in cases…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Robinson v. BaughMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- United States Mitis Co. v. Detroit Steel & Spring Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1903
- Wardle v. CummingsMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Bernier v. BernierMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Township of Lebanon v. BurchMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.