TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Hurlburt v. Reed

Franklin Hurlburt v. William W. Reed

Hurlburt v. Reed, 5 Mich. 30 (1858)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Michigan Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 11, 1858
Judges
Manning
Citations
5 Mich. 301858 Mich. LEXIS 5
Headnotes
In a suit commenced by attachment against a non-resident, the Circuit Court may, in the exercise of a sound discretion, set aside the judgment, and permit the defendant to plead, where he has had no notice of the proceeding against him in season to make his defense, and has been guilty of no laches. And this, though a term has elapsed.
Summary
Case reserved from Ingham Circuit. Suit was commenced in the Circuit Court, by attachment of real estate, against the defendant, who was a non-resident, and judgment regularly obtained at the April Term, 1857. Defendant had no knowledge of the proceedings until about the twelfth of June, 1857; and, at the earliest opportunity thereafter, which was at the July Term, 1857, on affidavit of these facts, and of a defense on the merits, he made a motion to set aside the judgment and all subsequent proceedings, and for leave to plead. On behalf of plaintiff, it was insisted that his proceedings having been regular, and a term having elapsed since judgment, the Court had no authority to set aside the judgment and permit defendant to plead; and the Circuit Judge reserved the question whether the Court had such authority, for the opinion of this Court.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Manning

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Manning J.:

The case of Loree vs. Reeves, 2 Mich. 133 , we think is in point in this case. We have no doubt that, in a suit commenced by attachment against a non-resident, the Court may, in the exercise of a sound discretion, set aside the judgment, and permit the defendant to plead to the declaration, where he has had no notice of the proceeding against him in season to make his defense, and has been guilty of no laches.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1880–1881: 11924–1925: 118802026peak 1880 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Nealis v. Dicks72 Ind. 374 (1880)
  2. Partch v. Baird199 N.W. 692 (Mich. 1924)

Most recent

  1. Partch v. Baird199 N.W. 692 (Mich. 1924)
  2. Nealis v. Dicks72 Ind. 374 (1880)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Loree v. Reeves, 2 Mich. 133 (1851) 8

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list