Lynch v. Durfee

59 N.W. 409, 101 Mich. 171, 1894 Mich. LEXIS 897
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedJune 16, 1894
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 59 N.W. 409 (Lynch v. Durfee) 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
Lynch v. Durfee, 59 N.W. 409, 101 Mich. 171, 1894 Mich. LEXIS 897 (Mich. 1894).

Opinion

Long, J.

Petitioner is one of the heirs at law of Timothy Lynch, deceased. On April 23, 1894, a petition was filed in the probate court for Wayne county by Patrick Lynch, a brother of petitioner, praying for the appointment of an administrator, as the deceased died intestate. An order was entered that the matter be set for hearing on May 22, 1894, and that notice of hearing be published in the Wayne County Legal News. Petitioner filed a protest against the appointment, on the' ground, among others, that the Wayne County Legal News, in which the notice was published, was not a newspaper printed and circulating in said county and State, within the meaning of the statute. This protest was overruled, and petitioner made application to the Wayne circuit court for a writ of prohibition against the probate judge, restraining the appointment on that ground. An order to show cause was granted, and the probate judge answered. Upon the hearing, the writ of prohibition was denied. The case now comes here on certiorari to review that finding.

[173]*173How. Stat. § 5801, provides that the probate court shall appoint a time and place for proving any will, and “ shall cause public notice thereof to be given by personal service on all persons interested, or by publication under an order of such court in such newspaper printed in this State as the judge shall direct, three weeks successively,” etc.

Section 5866 provides that—

“When application shall be made to the judge of probate for the appointment of an administrator on an intestate estate, or for letters of administration with the will annexed, he shall cause notice of the same, and of the time and place of hearing thereof, to be published for three successive weeks in such newspaper as he may direct.”

Section 6808 provides:

“All probate and other legal notices required by law to be published by the judge of probate of any county * * * shall be published in some newspaper printed in the county where said probate judge shall hold his court.”

Section 9031 provides that—

“All legal advertisements shall be published in a newspaper printed in the county in which the proceedings are carried on,” etc.

These are the only provisions of our statutes relating to such publication.

The answer of the judge of probate made to the order of the court below to show cause sets up that the Wayne County Legal News is a newspaper, published weekly in the city of Detroit, and, while devoted primarily to the interests of the legal profession and the dissemination of legal knowledge, yet it is also intended to contain, and does contain, matters of interest to the general public; that it contains the proceedings of the Supreme Court of the State of Michigan, the Wayne circuit court, and the other courts of the - city of Detroit, and also contains notices of future proceedings in said courts; that it also con[174]*174tains, from time to time, opinions of the courts of the United States and of the other States, and also of other counties in Michigan, where the same are of interest to the legal profession or to the general public; that it also contains personal items of general interest, and notices of passing events; and respondent, asserts on information and belief that it is intended, when the Legislature is in session, to contain the proceedings thereof, and general items of interest in connection therewith. The answer further states that it contains a record of real-estate transfers and mortgages, chattel mortgages, and bills of sale, and also advertisements, not only relating to the legal profession, but general trade advertisements, of interest to every one; that it is intended to circulate, and in fact has a present circulation, among judges, lawyers, bankers, brokers, real-estate agents, merchants, and business men, and is intended to contain items of importance to all, and is on sale at the news stands in the city of Detroit. The answer further asserts that the Wayne County Legal News is intended-to fill the same position in the county of Wayne, State of Michigan, as is filled at present by the Chicago Legal News, the Toledo Legal News, the -St. Louis Legal Record, and other papers of similar nature in other cities; that it is not an innovation in the newspaper field, there being, as respondent asserts, upwards of 40 similar journals now published. A copy of the paper is filed with this return, as well as copies of the Chicago Legal News and other legal journals, which indicate the actual character of the Wayne County Legal News, and the field which it is intended to cover.

Similar provisions to sections 5801 and 5866, above referred to, are to be found in the Revised Statutes of 1846; the other provisions quoted were enacted in 1853 and 1857; so that these statutes were on the statute books long before the newspaper field was occupied by the many [175]*175thousands of publications we now find in circulation. But a newspaper, even in the days when these statutes were enacted, meant what it means to-day, — a sheet of paper printed and distributed at short intervals for conveying intelligence of passing events; a public print that circulates news, advertisements, proceedings of legislative bodies, public documents, and the like. Under the return here we are unable to say that this paper does not come within this definition. Our statutes are quite similar to those of other states in reference to the publication of such notices. The Chicago Legal News was held to be a newspaper within the meaning of the Illinois statute. Kerr v. Hitt, 75 Ill. 51. The St. Louis Legal Record was held to be such a newspaper within the meaning of the Missouri statute in Kellogg v. Carrico, 47 Mo. 157. See, also, Hernandez v. Drake, 81 Ill. 34; Railton v. Lauder, 126 Id. 129; Id., 26 Ill. App. 655; Maass v. Hess, 140 Ill. 576; Benkendorf v. Vincenz, 52 Mo. 441; Hull v. King, 38 Minn. 349; Beecher v. Stephens, 25 Id. 146.

It was said in Beecher v. Stephens, supra:

“Newspapers are of so many varieties that it would be next to impossible to give any brief definition which would include and describe all kinds of newspapers.”

In Hull v. King, supra, the court quote this language, and further say:

“It would therefore be unsafe to attempt to give any definition of the term, except the very general one that, according to the usage of the business world and in ordinary understanding, a newspaper is a publication, usually in sheet form, intended for general circulation, and published regularly at short intervals, containing intelligence of current events and news of general interest. * * * But if a publication contains the general and current news of the day, it is none the less a newspaper because it is chiefly devoted to the dissemination of intelligence of a particular kind or to the advocacy of particular principles or views. Most newspapers are devoted largely to special [176]*176interests, — political, religious, financial, moral, social, and the like; and each is naturally patronized mainly by those who are in accord with the views which it advocates, or who are most interested in the kind of intelligence “to which it gives special prominence. But if it gives the general current news of the day, it still comes within the definition of a newspaper.”

In the case of Kellogg v. Carrico, supra,

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

Related

State Ex Rel. Bowler v. Board of County Commissioners
76 P.2d 648 (Montana Supreme Court, 1938)
Bising v. City of Cincinnati
184 N.E. 837 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1933)
Burak v. Ditson
229 N.W. 227 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1930)
Sims v. Etheridge
150 S.E. 647 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1929)
Culclasure v. Consolidated Bond & Mortgage Co.
114 So. 540 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
State Ex Rel. Yaegar v. Rose
114 So. 373 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
Baldwin v. Brown
224 P. 462 (California Supreme Court, 1924)
In Re "Labor Journal"
213 P. 498 (California Supreme Court, 1923)
In Re Application of Green
131 P. 91 (California Court of Appeal, 1913)
Olsen v. Bibb Co.
135 N.W. 385 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1912)
Brice v. Graves
121 N.W. 504 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1909)
Puget Sound Publishing Co. v. Times Printing Co.
74 P. 802 (Washington Supreme Court, 1903)
Hall v. City of Milwaukee
91 N.W. 998 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1902)
United States Mortgage Co. v. Marquam
69 P. 37 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1902)
Lynn v. Allen
44 N.E. 646 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1896)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
59 N.W. 409, 101 Mich. 171, 1894 Mich. LEXIS 897, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lynch-v-durfee-mich-1894.