Legal Opinion

Jones v. Pendleton

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 3, 1907No. Docket No. 47PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Error to Wayne; Brooke, J. Assumpsit by Clarence R. Jones, administrator de bonis non of the estate of James A. Jones, deceased, against Edward W. Pendleton for commissions on the sale of real estate. There was an order denying a motion to amend the declaration, and a judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court, and plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtBlair, J.

Plaintiff prosecutes a writ of error to review an order denying him leave to file an amended declaration. The nature of the case will be disclosed by a reference to Jones v. Pendleton, 134 Mich. 460, and Jones v. Wayne Circuit Judge, 141 Mich. 408.

We are of the opinion that the mandamus proceedings may properly be treated as an exception to the ruling of Judge Mandell, but the motion for leave to amend and the order and opinion of Judge Mandell are not part of the record before us.

It appearing to the court, however, that justice requires *545a review of the order made by Judge Mandell, denying…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Jones v. PendletonMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Jones v. Wayne Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1905

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Jones v. PendletonMichigan Supreme Court · 1910

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

Powered by the Exa API