Armstrong v. Fry

Circuit Court of the 10th Circuit of Michigan

Armstrong v. Fry

1 Mich. N.P. 23

Circuit Court of the 10th Circuit of Michigan·Decided October 8, 1869·Published

Opinion

Sutherland, Judge.

Paragraph 3856, C. L. applies to such a case. The return having been made, it is conclusive evidence that the costs and fees have been paid. The “ costs of the justice” and “ such fees ” mentioned -in that section — “ the fee paid to the justice,” in § 3864, and “ the fees of the justice.” in sub. 6, § 3845, all refer to the moneys for fees and costs required to be paid by $ 3840, in order to appeal.

Motion denied, with usual motion costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Sutherland, Judge.

Paragraph 3856, C. L. applies to such a case. The return having been made, it is conclusive evidence that the costs and fees have been paid. The “ costs of the justice” and “ such fees ” mentioned -in that section — “ the fee paid to the justice,” in § 3864, and “ the fees of the justice.” in sub. 6, § 3845, all refer to the moneys for fees and costs required to be paid by $ 3840, in order to appeal.

Motion denied, with usual motion costs.

Armstrong v. Fry, 1 Mich. N.P. 23 (Mich. Super. Ct. 1869).

Pincite

1 Mich. N.P. 23 (Armstrong v. Fry) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.