Gray v. Eldred

107 N.W. 719, 144 Mich. 23, 1906 Mich. LEXIS 991
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided April 30, 1906·No. Docket No. 188·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Grant, J.

(after stating the facts). No such practice is known to the courts of this State. When defendants in a chancery suit have answered, and in their answer have inserted the usual demurrer clause, and replications have been filed, the case must go to a hearing upon the issues joined and a final decree rendered. It is neither proper nor good practice to permit parties to then take advantage of a demurrer and bring the case into this court by piecemeal. The result would be two trials, and possibly two appeals to this court to determine the issues, and great delay. We cannot sanction such a practice, even at the request of the parties litigant.

Without determining the questions raised, the order of the court will be set aside, and the case remanded for hearing upon proofs, should the parties desire to introduce any. No costs will be allowed.

McAlvay, Montgomery, Hooker, and Moore, JJ., concurred.

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

Gray v. Eldred, 107 N.W. 719, 144 Mich. 23, 1906 Mich. LEXIS 991 (Mich. 1906).

107 N.W. 719 (Gray v. Eldred) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gustin v. Alpena Circuit Judge
280 N.W. 727 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1938)
Union Trust Co. v. Kirchberg
140 N.W. 464 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1913)
Pratt v. Millard
117 N.W. 552 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1908)