Plumer v. Abbey

Michigan Supreme Court

Plumer v. Abbey

39 Mich. 167, 1878 Mich. LEXIS 249

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedJune 21, 1878

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 39 Mich. 167 (Plumer v. Abbey) 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

Plumer v. Abbey, 39 Mich. 167, 1878 Mich. LEXIS 249 (Mich. 1878).

Pincite

Opinion

Mabston, J.

This is a case made after judgment. From an examination of the record it appears that upon each and every question raised during the progress of the trial the court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. The [168]*168case was tried by the court without a jury. Judgment was rendered in favor of defendant LeGrand Abbey, and in favor of plaintiffs as against Aaron Abbey. The evidence and proceedings upon the trial are all substantially set forth in the case' made, but there is no finding of facts by the circuit judge, nor does it appear that any request was made for such a finding. The plaintiffs here claim that they were entitled to a judgment as against LeGrand Abbey also; It is very clear that as the case stands here there is nothing for this court to consider. Plaintiffs did not take any exceptions during the trial. They could not, as the rulings were all in their favor. The court found against them upon the facts, and there being no findings of fact, we cannot examine the evidence in order to ascertain whether the conclusions of the court thereon were correct.

The judgment must be affirmed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

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

Mabston, J.

This is a case made after judgment. From an examination of the record it appears that upon each and every question raised during the progress of the trial the court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. The [168]*168case was tried by the court without a jury. Judgment was rendered in favor of defendant LeGrand Abbey, and in favor of plaintiffs as against Aaron Abbey. The evidence and proceedings upon the trial are all substantially set forth in the case' made, but there is no finding of facts by the circuit judge, nor does it appear that any request was made for such a finding. The plaintiffs here claim that they were entitled to a judgment as against LeGrand Abbey also; It is very clear that as the case stands here there is nothing for this court to consider. Plaintiffs did not take any exceptions during the trial. They could not, as the rulings were all in their favor. The court found against them upon the facts, and there being no findings of fact, we cannot examine the evidence in order to ascertain whether the conclusions of the court thereon were correct.

The judgment must be affirmed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 Mich. 167, 1878 Mich. LEXIS 249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/plumer-v-abbey-mich-1878.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack