In Re Ach Estate

Michigan Supreme Court

In Re Ach Estate

84 N.W.2d 533, 349 Mich. 47, 1957 Mich. LEXIS 324

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 31, 1957

DocketCalendar 46,876

StatusPublished

This text of 84 N.W.2d 533 (In Re Ach Estate) 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

In Re Ach Estate, 84 N.W.2d 533, 349 Mich. 47, 1957 Mich. LEXIS 324 (Mich. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

*49 Black, J.

(after stating the facts). This record portrays an instance of unfortunate grant of leave to review a circuit court order, the iatter being interlocutory in nature. The result, apparent now on belated submission of the appeal so granted, becomes a regrettable compound of unnecessary delay in probating an estate long overdue for settlement. We hasten toward corrective action.

The probate court order of October 4th — whether it be termed interlocutory or final — was appealable by the heir of right. So far as present inquiry is concerned Court Rule No 75 (revised in 1949) fits its provisions to the general statute governing appeals from probate to circuit (see Section 6 of the rule as revised). The statute grants right of appeal —unconditionally and without requirement of leave —, to “any person aggrieved,” from “any order, sentence, decree or denial of the judge of probate” (CL 1948, §701.36 [Stat Ann 1943 Rev §27.3178(36)]). The' statutory exceptions to such unconditional right of appeal appear in the next ensuing section (CL 1948, §701.37 [Stat Ann 1943 Rev §27.3178(37)]). *50 Since the probate court order of October 4th does not come within the specific exceptions noted in the last-mentioned section, the motion to dismiss appeal was properly denied by the circuit judge.

Affirmed, with costs to appellee.

Dethmers, 0. J., and Sharpe, Smith, Edwards,. Voelker, Kelly and Carr, JJ., concurred.

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

*49 Black, J.

(after stating the facts). This record portrays an instance of unfortunate grant of leave to review a circuit court order, the iatter being interlocutory in nature. The result, apparent now on belated submission of the appeal so granted, becomes a regrettable compound of unnecessary delay in probating an estate long overdue for settlement. We hasten toward corrective action.

The probate court order of October 4th — whether it be termed interlocutory or final — was appealable by the heir of right. So far as present inquiry is concerned Court Rule No 75 (revised in 1949) fits its provisions to the general statute governing appeals from probate to circuit (see Section 6 of the rule as revised). The statute grants right of appeal —unconditionally and without requirement of leave —, to “any person aggrieved,” from “any order, sentence, decree or denial of the judge of probate” (CL 1948, §701.36 [Stat Ann 1943 Rev §27.3178(36)]). The' statutory exceptions to such unconditional right of appeal appear in the next ensuing section (CL 1948, §701.37 [Stat Ann 1943 Rev §27.3178(37)]). *50 Since the probate court order of October 4th does not come within the specific exceptions noted in the last-mentioned section, the motion to dismiss appeal was properly denied by the circuit judge.

Affirmed, with costs to appellee.

Dethmers, 0. J., and Sharpe, Smith, Edwards,. Voelker, Kelly and Carr, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 N.W.2d 533, 349 Mich. 47, 1957 Mich. LEXIS 324, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ach-estate-mich-1957.