Warren v. Lenawee Circuit Judge

125 N.W. 712, 160 Mich. 572
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided April 1, 1910·No. Calendar Nos. 23,351, 23,352·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Montgomery, C. J.

Two cases were instituted by bill in chancery in the circuit court against the present relators, and it is moved to dismiss the proceedings for the want of jurisdiction. The circuit judge overruled the motion, and the defendants now apply for mandamus to compel the vacation of the order refusing to dismiss the cases.

The remedy by mandamus is not the proper remedy. Michigan Mut. Fire-Ins. Co. v. Wayne Circuit Judge, 112 Mich. 270 (70 N. W. 582), and Hitchcock v. Wayne Circuit Judge, 144 Mich. 362 (107 N. W. 1123).

[573]*573The statute (Act No. 310, Pub. Acts 1905) has not modified the rule of these cases, as that statute relates to actions at law.

The application in each case is denied, with costs.

Ostrander, Hooker, Moore, and McAlvay, JJ., concurred.

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

Warren v. Lenawee Circuit Judge, 125 N.W. 712, 160 Mich. 572 (Mich. 1910).

125 N.W. 712 (Warren v. Lenawee Circuit Judge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hamilton Carhartt Cotton Mills v. Wayne Circuit Judge
203 N.W. 836 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1925)
Brooks v. Hargrave
127 N.W. 689 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1910)