People ex rel. Taylor v. Judge of the St. Clair Circuit
The People on the relation of John R. Taylor v. The Judge of the St. Clair Circuit
People ex rel. Taylor v. Judge of the St. Clair Circuit, 32 Mich. 95 (1875)
Headnotes
Circuit courts: JSwpei'visory jurisdiction: Inferior tribmials: Certiorari: Proceedings before commissioner to dissolve attachment Circuit courts have, under the constitution (Art. VI, § S), a general supervisory control, subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the supreme court, over inferior courts and. tribunals; and they may issue a common-law certiorari to bring up for review proceedings before a circuit court c.ommissioner for the dissolution of an attachment.
Summary
Application for Mandamus.
Eelator commenced suit by attachment against one Marcus Young in the St. Clair circuit. Young, after having moved the court to quash the proceedings for insufficiency of the affidavit and failed in his motion, applied to the circuit court commissioner of the county to dissolve the attachment, and the commissioner dissolved it for insufficiency of the affidavit in form. The relator thereupon applied to the circuit judge for a certiorari to review the proceedings before the commissioner, which writ was granted. When the cause came on for hearing, however, the circuit judge declined to hear it on the ground of want of jurisdiction. The relator applies for mandamus to require the respondent to reinstate the cause and hear and determine it on its merits, and makes a showing of the above facts, and also that the commissioner’s term had since expired, and that he was not reelected, and that for that reason, as the relator is advised, he is prevented from suing out a new writ of certiorari.
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Pee OueiaM:
This case is ruled by Thompson v. School District No. 6 of Crockery, 25 Mich., 483 .
The writ must issue.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.