Sanford v. Haines
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from Montcalm. (Smith, J.) Bill in the nature of a bill of review. Defendants appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.
This is a bill the object of which is to get rid of a foreclosure decree, and of the sale under it, and to open the case on its merits, and allow complainant to redeem. It is in effect a bill in the nature of a bill of review, filed without leave and without security, as required by rule 101, and filed after a long delay. The bill is not sworn to, and is not accompanied by any sworn showing, without which no leave could properly be granted. *117These would be sufficient reasons why it should not be .sustained, and why the court below should have dismissed it. But on the facts alleged it is not…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Dodge v. NorthropMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Cook v. HallMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
- Pomeroy v. NoudMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
- Brown v. NapperMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
- Tisman v. TismanMichigan Supreme Court · 1913