McCombs v. Johnson

11 N.W. 400, 47 Mich. 592, 1882 Mich. LEXIS 708
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 25, 1882
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 11 N.W. 400 (McCombs v. Johnson) 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
McCombs v. Johnson, 11 N.W. 400, 47 Mich. 592, 1882 Mich. LEXIS 708 (Mich. 1882).

Opinion

Cooley, J.

An appeal from the judgment of a justice of the peace was dismissed in this case on the ground that it had not been taken in due season, and also because no' return had ever been made to it.

The appeal appears to have been duly claimed on the fourth day after judgment was rendered, and a bond was tendered on that day. The justice makes affidavit that he ■ required another surety to the bond before, he would approve it, and that the appellant took it away to procure a surety, and did not return it until the sixth day after judgment;. which would have been too late. The bond was then approved, and the approval is dated as of the time when it. was first presented.

The justice also says he never made any return to the appeal, and that his fees for making one were not paid. A transcript of the proceedings before him is on file, together [594]*594with, the appeal bond, but he explains this by saying that he gave a transcript to the appellant for his own use, and not for filing. This is denied by the appellant, and there is much reason for believing the justice is mistaken. It is shown in the case that subsequent to the filing of the transcript and bond the justice himself put on file in the circuit court the paper on which suit was brought; and he would have been very unlikely to do this if he had not understood an appeal had been taken.

But what is more conclusive in the case is, that the appellees entered their appearance generally in the circuit court before the motion to dismiss was made. That was conclusive of the jurisdiction of the circuit court. Shaw v. Moser 3 Mich. 71; Tower v. Lamb 6 Mich. 36.

As the case was finally disposed of in the court below, a writ of error will bring up the record.

The judgment of dismissal must be reversed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

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

Related

Dunn's Estate v. Wayne Circuit Judge
222 N.W. 194 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1928)
Bates v. Price
166 P. 261 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1917)
Love v. . Huffines
66 S.E. 304 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1909)
City of Flint v. Genesee Circuit Judge
109 N.W. 769 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1906)
Simons v. Mason City & Fort Dodge Railroad
103 N.W. 129 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1905)
Goodin v. Van Haaften
90 N.W. 23 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1902)
Sherwood v. Ionia Circuit Judge
107 Mich. 136 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
11 N.W. 400, 47 Mich. 592, 1882 Mich. LEXIS 708, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccombs-v-johnson-mich-1882.