Spears v. Chapman

5 N.W. 1038, 43 Mich. 541, 1880 Mich. LEXIS 861
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided June 9, 1880·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Marston, C. J.

These cases are substantially alike, and in each the judgment must be reversed. This court has held recently in several cases that the garnishee’s disclosure in justice’s court must show a liability to the principal defendant before a judgment can be rendered thereon. If the disclosure is ambiguous, leaving it uncertain whether any indebtedness exists, or if so, to whom, and the ease substantially rests upon that, the plaintiff must fail. The garnishee is the plaintiff’s witness, and the burden of proof is upon Mm to make out by that witness a prima facie case. •

Judgments reversed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

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

Spears v. Chapman, 5 N.W. 1038, 43 Mich. 541, 1880 Mich. LEXIS 861 (Mich. 1880).

5 N.W. 1038 (Spears v. Chapman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Zucker v. Cervelli
187 N.E.2d 66 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1962)
Ruhl v. A. Ruoff Brewing Co.
71 N.W. 526 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1897)
Barber v. Howd
48 N.W. 539 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1891)
Isabelle v. Iron Cliffs Co.
23 N.W. 613 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1885)
Ball v. Young
18 N.W. 225 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1884)
Walker v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railroad
13 N.W. 812 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1882)
Weirich v. Scribner
6 N.W. 91 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1880)