Ingersoll v. Kirby

Michigan Court of Chancery

Ingersoll v. Kirby

1 Walk. Ch. 27

DecidedJune 15, 1842

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Walk. Ch. 27 (Ingersoll v. Kirby) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ingersoll v. Kirby, 1 Walk. Ch. 27 (Mich. Ct. App. 1842).

Pincite

Opinion

The Chancellor.

The day of the month and not of the week must govern, when they fall on different days, as in the present case ; and the summons was not served in season for the seventh of December, the rule requiring at least two days’ service. If the mistake had been in naming the day of the week, that part of the summons might be rejected as surplusage, and the summons stillbe good, unless the party had been misled by it.

Motion granted.

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

The Chancellor.

The day of the month and not of the week must govern, when they fall on different days, as in the present case ; and the summons was not served in season for the seventh of December, the rule requiring at least two days’ service. If the mistake had been in naming the day of the week, that part of the summons might be rejected as surplusage, and the summons stillbe good, unless the party had been misled by it.

Motion granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Walk. Ch. 27, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ingersoll-v-kirby-michchanct-1842.