Scribner v. Doseman

Michigan Supreme Court

Scribner v. Doseman

5 Mich. 283, 1858 Mich. LEXIS 44

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 9, 1858

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 5 Mich. 283 (Scribner v. Doseman) 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

Scribner v. Doseman, 5 Mich. 283, 1858 Mich. LEXIS 44 (Mich. 1858).

Pincite

Opinion

The Coubt held that, in all cases of special motions, notice must be given if the opposite party has appeared in the cause. A plaintiff in error is always in court, and always entitled to notice. Where he does not prosecute his writ by attorney, he is entitled to have notice served upon himself in the manner provided by the Rules. Defendant in error is only entitled to such notice after having appeared.

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

The Coubt held that, in all cases of special motions, notice must be given if the opposite party has appeared in the cause. A plaintiff in error is always in court, and always entitled to notice. Where he does not prosecute his writ by attorney, he is entitled to have notice served upon himself in the manner provided by the Rules. Defendant in error is only entitled to such notice after having appeared.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Mich. 283, 1858 Mich. LEXIS 44, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scribner-v-doseman-mich-1858.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack