Hintz v. Wayne Circuit Judge

Michigan Supreme Court

Hintz v. Wayne Circuit Judge

222 N.W. 722, 245 Mich. 306, 1929 Mich. LEXIS 957

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedApril 3, 1928

DocketCalendar 33,294

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 222 N.W. 722 (Hintz v. Wayne Circuit Judge) 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

Hintz v. Wayne Circuit Judge, 222 N.W. 722, 245 Mich. 306, 1929 Mich. LEXIS 957 (Mich. 1928).

Pincite

Opinions

The part of the order for temporary alimony requiring defendant "to make all payments and properly finance all arrearages upon the premises occupied by plaintiff" was in excess of power in the court and a nullity.

We are advised by the record that it will require the sum of upward of $5,000 to finance such property against immediate existing grounds of forfeiture and loss

Judicial power to decree divorce and all interlocutory proceedings, inclusive of temporary alimony, expense money, and counsel fees, is purely statutory, and the ordinary principles of equity jurisdiction do not obtain. That the power is strictly statutory, see Maslen v. Anderson, 163 Mich. 477; Heck v. Bailey, 204 Mich. 54. As stated by Mr. Justice POTTER inRitzer v. Ritzer, 243 Mich. 406:

"The power to award alimony is wholly statutory."

No statute vests power in the court to direct or compel the husband, by interlocutory order, to pay out money to conserve his property rights or those of his wife.

The writ will issue directing the circuit judge to set aside the part of the order we hold null and void. No costs.

NORTH, C.J., and FELLOWS, McDONALD, and SHARPE, JJ., concurred with WIEST, J. *Page 310

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