Rothman v. Circuit Judge

1 McGrath 192
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 10, 1891
DocketNo. 11724
StatusPublished

This text of 1 McGrath 192 (Rothman v. Circuit Judge) 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
Rothman v. Circuit Judge, 1 McGrath 192 (Mich. 1891).

Opinion

To compel the circuit judge to dismiss an appeal from Justice Court. ,

Granted February 10, 1891, with costs.

Nelator recovered judgment against one Child, on August 11, 1890. On August 18, 1890, Child presented to the justice an affidavit and bond on appeal. The justice made return to the Circuit Court. • On October 13,- 1890, relator’s attorneys entered a general appearance and on the same day entered a motion to dismiss the appeal because not taken within the statutory time. The court denied the motion, holding that the entry of appearance operated as a waiver.

Relator contended (1) that the failure to file the affidavit and bond on appeal within the time, was jurisdictional and could not be waived, citing Smart vs. Howe, 3 M., 590; Moore vs. Ellis, 18 M., 77; Canal Co. vs. Haas, 20 M., 326; Dale vs. Lavigne, 31 M., 148; Franks vs. Smith, 45 M., 326. (2) That the appearance and motion should be construed together, citing Wiley vs. Circuit Judge, 29 M., 486 (No. 203); Michaels vs. Stork, 44 M., 2; Franks vs. Smith, 45 M., 326; U. S. vs. Yates, 6 How. (U. S.), 605; Dow vs. Gibbony, 3 Hughes, 382; Reinstadler vs. Reeves, 33 Fed. Rep., 308; Cruger vs. R. R. Co., 2 Kern. (N. Y.), 190. As to whether mandamus is the proper remedy in such case, relator cited, Conrad vs. Freeland, 18 M., 255; Wiley vs. Circuit Judge, 29 M., 486 (No. 203); Detroit & B. P. R. Co. vs. Circuit Judge, 27 M., 303 (171); Comstock vs. Circuit Judge, 30 M., 98 (170); Miller vs. Circuit Judge, 41 M., 326 (116); Stevenson vs. Circuit Judge, 44 M., 162 (202); Franks vs. Smith, 45 M., 326; Ellair vs. Circuit Judge, 46 M., 496 (No. 146); Hamilton vs. Circuit Judge, 52 M., 409 (172); Daniels vs. Circuit Judge, 60 M., 219 (152); King vs. Circuit Judge, 69 M., 84 (138); Brady vs. R. R. Co., 73 M., 457.

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

Related

Dorr v. Gibboney
7 F. Cas. 923 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Virginia, 1878)
Miller v. Circuit Judge
1 McGrath 115 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1879)
King v. Circuit Judge
1 McGrath 138 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1888)
Ellair v. Circuit Judge
1 McGrath 144 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1881)
Daniels v. Circuit Judge
1 McGrath 157 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1886)
Detroit & Birmingham Plank Road Co. v. Circuit Judge
1 McGrath 170 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1873)
Stevenson v. Circuit Judge
1 McGrath 202 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1880)
Wiley v. Circuit Judge
1 McGrath 202 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1874)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 McGrath 192, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rothman-v-circuit-judge-mich-1891.