TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Wellover v. Soule

Abram M. Wellover v. George G. Soule

Wellover v. Soule, 30 Mich. 481 (1874)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Michigan Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 30, 1874
Judges
Cooley, Other
Citations
30 Mich. 4811874 Mich. LEXIS 223
Cited by 9
Headnotes
Garnishee proceedings: Return day of summons: Clerical error: Appearance and answer; Waiver. A mere clerical error as to the month in the return day of a garnishee summons is waived by appearance and answer on the day intended, and is not fatal to the proceedings; and the summons might be amended in this regard after answer, or the mistake be disregarded. Garnishee proceedings: Separate liability. A garnishee defendant cannot be held where his answer negatives any separate liability to the principal defendant. Garnishee proceedings ; Justice's courts: Answer: Evidence : Appeal. The garnishee’s answer, made on oath and subscribed in the justice’s court, is entitled to be considered as evidence on the trial of the cause on appeal in the circuit. Correct conclusion : Wrong reason. A correct judgment will not be reversed because an invalid reason was given for a conclusion which was correct.
Summary
Error to Allegan Circuit. Wellover sued one Emily Piersons before a justice of the peace and garnished George G. Soule. The garnishee summons was dated April 28, 1873, and was served the same day. The return day named in the summons was April 10th, 1873. On May 10th, 1873, the garnishee defendant appeared and answered. His answer showed that he individually was not indebted to the principal defendant, but that the firm of Winegar & Soule, of which he was a member, was indebted to her in the sum of one hundred and eighty-two dollars. The justice having rendered judgment in favor of the garnishee defendant, the plaintiff appealed to the circuit, where the cause was dismissed, on motion of the appellee, for want of jurisdiction, on the ground that there was no service of a proper garnishee summons. The plaintiff thereupon brought error.

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

Opinion of the Court — Cooley

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

Cooley, J.

The circuit judge was mistaken in supposing that the error of the justice in making the garnishee summons returnable on the tenth day of April, instead of the tenth day of May, was fatal to the proceedings. This was obviously a mere clerical error, and the appearance and answer of the garnishee on the day intended, was a waiver of the error, and the summons might then have been amended, or the mistake disregarded.

But we also think that no mistake has been committed of which the plaintiff can complain. The garnishee’s answer negatived any separate liability to the principal *483 •debtor, and in any event judgment must have passed in his favor. This was ruled in Newell v. Blair, 7 Mich., 103 , which is decisive of the present case. The only error committed by the circuit judge was in giving an invalid reason for his conclusion; but this constitutes no ground for -reversing a correct judgment.

The judgment must be affirmed, with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 9 cases

View all citing references →
1881–1882: 11883–1884: 11891–1892: 11895–1896: 11897–1898: 11899–1900: 11913–1914: 11929–1930: 11937–1938: 118812026peak 1881 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Fletcher v. Wear81 Mo. 524 (1884)
  2. Munn v. Haynes9 N.W. 136 (Mich. 1881)
  3. Shevin v. Venderbush Company273 N.W. 780 (Mich. 1937)
  4. Barr v. Warner62 P. 899 (Or. 1900)
  5. Gilmore & Ruhl v. Cohn102 Iowa 254 (1897)
  6. Barber v. Howd48 N.W. 539 (Mich. 1891)

Most recent

  1. Shevin v. Venderbush Company273 N.W. 780 (Mich. 1937)
  2. Clarence Hodson & Co. v. Wills Sainte Claire226 N.W. 817 (Mich. 1929)
  3. Chamberlain v. Wallace142 N.W. 1072 (Mich. 1913)
  4. Barr v. Warner62 P. 899 (Or. 1900)
  5. Gilmore & Ruhl v. Cohn102 Iowa 254 (1897)
  6. Ferry v. Cincinnati Underwriters69 N.W. 483 (Mich. 1896)

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
Newell v. Blair, 7 Mich. 103 (1859) 9

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