Slattery v. Hilliker
William Slattery v. Wilbert Hilliker
Headnotes
Summary
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.
Cooley, J.
This case • originated in justice’s court. The return of the constable to the process which commenced it, showed due service. The defendant appeared on the return day and pleaded to the merits. Subsequently the constable was permitted by the justice to amend his return, and he made such an amendment as *574 showed the service to have been insufficient. The defendant thereupon moved to dismiss the cause, which motion was denied. The denial of this motion is the error now relied upon.
When the motion to dismiss was made, there was an issue on the merits, and no motion was made by defendant for leave to withdraw his plea. At that stage of the case it was of no importance whether the writ was or was not properly served. Stone v. Welling, 14 Mich., 514; Falkner v. Beers, 2 Doug. (Mich.), 117.
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 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
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.