Toliver v. Brownell
This text of 54 N.W. 302 (Toliver v. Brownell) 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.
Opinion
Plaintiff brought suit in justice’s court against the defendant. The suit was tried upon June 17, and judgment reserved.. Subsequently the justice rendered judgment, which appears upon his docket of date June 21. In his return to the writ the justice says that he was absent, in Chicago, the entire of June 21; that said judgment was in fact rendered June 20, but was erroneously entered upon his docket as rendered the 21st.
Upon its face the judgment was valid. This is a direct proceeding in the case to question the jurisdiction of the justice, and is a proper proceeding for that purpose. The docket entry must control, and a justice of the peace cannot change his docket for the purpose of taking away or conferring jurisdiction. Weaver v. Lammon, 62 Mich. 366. The justice, in this case, could not have rendered judgment on the 21st, because he was beyond his jurisdiction. Under the decision above cited, he cannot now be heard to say that his docket is erroneous, and that he rendered judgment on another day, when he was within his jurisdiction.
It follows that the judgment must be reversed, and the proceedings quashed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
54 N.W. 302, 94 Mich. 577, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/toliver-v-brownell-mich-1893.