Smith v. Ingham Circuit Judge

Michigan Supreme Court

Smith v. Ingham Circuit Judge

298 N.W. 102, 297 Mich. 478

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 8, 1940

DocketCalendar 41,266

StatusPublished

This text of 298 N.W. 102 (Smith v. Ingham 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

Smith v. Ingham Circuit Judge, 298 N.W. 102, 297 Mich. 478 (Mich. 1940).

Pincite

Opinions

Per Curiam.

This is a petition for mandamus to compel Leland W. Carr, Ingham circuit judge, to vacate an order staying the payment of certain unemployment benefits by the Michigan unemployment compensation commission pending the determination of an appeal. The appeal in that case has been heard at the October session of court and the *479 questions raised are decided in Chrysler Corp. v. Smith, ante, 438 (135 A. L. R. 900). The purpose in seeking mandamus is to obtain the payment of benefits pending decision on the above appeal, without regard to the ultimate decision as to the rights of the parties.

Writ denied. No costs awarded, this being a question of public interest.

Sharpe, C. J., and Boyles, Chandler, North, Wiest, and Butzel, JJ., concurred.

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

Per Curiam.

This is a petition for mandamus to compel Leland W. Carr, Ingham circuit judge, to vacate an order staying the payment of certain unemployment benefits by the Michigan unemployment compensation commission pending the determination of an appeal. The appeal in that case has been heard at the October session of court and the *479 questions raised are decided in Chrysler Corp. v. Smith, ante, 438 (135 A. L. R. 900). The purpose in seeking mandamus is to obtain the payment of benefits pending decision on the above appeal, without regard to the ultimate decision as to the rights of the parties.

Writ denied. No costs awarded, this being a question of public interest.

Sharpe, C. J., and Boyles, Chandler, North, Wiest, and Butzel, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

298 N.W. 102, 297 Mich. 478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-ingham-circuit-judge-mich-1940.