People v. Ortwski

190 N.W. 239, 220 Mich. 462, 1922 Mich. LEXIS 920
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided November 2, 1922·No. Docket No. 90·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Clark, J.

Defendants were convicted of a violation of the prohibition law. The judgment was alternative, fine or imprisonment. It was conceded by counsel at the argument, and it is also indicated by the transcript of calendar entries in the record, that when the writ of error was sued out the fine had been paid. There is nothing in the record to indicate that the payment was under distress or duress beyond the [463] fact that the judgment was alternative. See People v. Leavitt, 41 Mich. 470; Clairview Park Imp. Co. v. Railway, 164 Mich. 74 (33 L. R. A. [N. S.] 250); Ideal Furnace Co. v. Molders’ Union, 204 Mich. 311; 17 C. J. p. 48.

The judgment having been* satisfied by payment, the writ has no office. It is dismissed.

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

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

People v. Ortwski, 190 N.W. 239, 220 Mich. 462, 1922 Mich. LEXIS 920 (Mich. 1922).

190 N.W. 239 (People v. Ortwski) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Carey
160 N.W.2d 799 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1968)
City of Denison v. McCord
105 N.W.2d 485 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1960)
State v. Osborne
54 A.2d 526 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1947)
Horowitz v. Rott
209 N.W. 131 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1926)
Thomas v. Montcalm Circuit Judge
199 N.W. 610 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1923)
People v. Melovicz
192 N.W. 562 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1923)