Mifflinburg Bank v. Bickhart

Michigan Supreme Court

Mifflinburg Bank v. Bickhart

194 N.W. 413, 224 Mich. 98, 1923 Mich. LEXIS 884

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 19, 1923

DocketDocket No. 96

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 194 N.W. 413 (Mifflinburg Bank v. Bickhart) 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

Mifflinburg Bank v. Bickhart, 194 N.W. 413, 224 Mich. 98, 1923 Mich. LEXIS 884 (Mich. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

Clark, J.

The trial judge granted, unconditionally, defendants’ motion for a new trial. Plaintiff seeks review on writ of error.

The unconditional granting of a motion for a new trial may not be reviewed on writ of error. See Decker v. Fair, 222 Mich. 507; Carton v. Day, 157 Mich. 43; 3 Comp. Laws 1915, §§ 13736, 12635, and cases cited in the annotations.

The writ is dismissed, with costs to defendants.

Wiest, C. J., and Fellows, McDonald, Bird, Sharpe, Moore, and Steere, JJ., concurred.

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