Chapman v. Chapman

Circuit Court of the 3rd Circuit of Michigan

Chapman v. Chapman

1 How. N.P. 18

CourtCircuit Court of the 3rd Circuit of Michigan

DecidedJune 15, 1883

StatusPublished

This text of 1 How. N.P. 18 (Chapman v. Chapman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Circuit Court of the 3rd Circuit of Michigan primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chapman v. Chapman, 1 How. N.P. 18 (Mich. Super. Ct. 1883).

Pincite

Opinion

Tue Cotjut,

Speed, J.,

Held, that bills of review seek to review or re-examine causes upon their merits.

The present bill does not raise the question as to the merits of the former cause, but aims upon extrinsic facts to vacate the decree.

Although bills in the nature of bills of review, impeaching decrees for fraud, are sometimes inaptly called original bills in the nature of bills of review, (Story’s Eq. Pleading Sec. 426) I am satisfied that the bills referred to in rule 101 are such only as may technically be styled Bills of Review, or bills in the nature of Bills of Review.

The motion is denied, with ten dollars costs.

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

Tue Cotjut,

Speed, J.,

Held, that bills of review seek to review or re-examine causes upon their merits.

The present bill does not raise the question as to the merits of the former cause, but aims upon extrinsic facts to vacate the decree.

Although bills in the nature of bills of review, impeaching decrees for fraud, are sometimes inaptly called original bills in the nature of bills of review, (Story’s Eq. Pleading Sec. 426) I am satisfied that the bills referred to in rule 101 are such only as may technically be styled Bills of Review, or bills in the nature of Bills of Review.

The motion is denied, with ten dollars costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 How. N.P. 18, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chapman-v-chapman-micirct3-1883.