Elliot v. Hanson

Michigan Supreme Court

Elliot v. Hanson

39 Mich. 157, 1878 Mich. LEXIS 244

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedJune 21, 1878

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 39 Mich. 157 (Elliot v. Hanson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Elliot v. Hanson, 39 Mich. 157, 1878 Mich. LEXIS 244 (Mich. 1878).

Pincite

Opinion

Campbell, C. J.

In this case a bond for arbitration was conditioned for the performance of an award to be made on or before the 3d day of August, 1872, at ten o’clock in the forenoon. The award was not made until the afternoon of that day, and the submission and hearing were begun after that hour. Suit being brought-on the bond it was held by the court below that no recovery could be had on it for the non-performance of the award.

[158]*158No question arises upon its legality between the parties, but only as to whether the bond covers it. We find no authority for disputing the correctness of the ruling of the circuit court. The point was passed upon and decided in the same way in Freeman v. Adams, 9 Johns., 115, and Bloomer v. Sherman, 5 Paige, 575. If the party has any remedy it must be on the award and the action of the two litigants in consenting to and taking part in the actual submission. Upon this we need not now decide.

The judgment must be affirmed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

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

Campbell, C. J.

In this case a bond for arbitration was conditioned for the performance of an award to be made on or before the 3d day of August, 1872, at ten o’clock in the forenoon. The award was not made until the afternoon of that day, and the submission and hearing were begun after that hour. Suit being brought-on the bond it was held by the court below that no recovery could be had on it for the non-performance of the award.

[158]*158No question arises upon its legality between the parties, but only as to whether the bond covers it. We find no authority for disputing the correctness of the ruling of the circuit court. The point was passed upon and decided in the same way in Freeman v. Adams, 9 Johns., 115, and Bloomer v. Sherman, 5 Paige, 575. If the party has any remedy it must be on the award and the action of the two litigants in consenting to and taking part in the actual submission. Upon this we need not now decide.

The judgment must be affirmed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 Mich. 157, 1878 Mich. LEXIS 244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elliot-v-hanson-mich-1878.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack