TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Simon v. Zarevich

Simon v. Zarevich, 181 N.W. 979 (Mich. 1921)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Michigan Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 30, 1921
Docket
No. 26
Judges
Bird, Clark, Late, Moore, Sharpe, Steers, Stone, Took
Citations
181 N.W. 979213 Mich. 6621921 Mich. LEXIS 608
Disposition
Affirmed.
Cited by 5
Headnotes
Appeal and Error — Exceptions-—Findings op Fact and Law— Review. Where, in a cause tried before the court without a jury, there were no findings of fact and law, and no exception taken to the opinion of the court, there is nothing for the appellate court to review, under Circuit Court Rule No. 45, and 3 Comp. Laws 1915, §§ 12586, 12587, nor may the Supreme Court examine the testimony to determine whether it supports the judgment.
Summary
Error to Wayne; Webster (Clyde I.), J. Assumpsit in justice’s court by James J. Simon .against Ljubica Zarevich for the amount of a judgment. There was judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appealed to the circuit court. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings 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 — Clark

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

Clark, J.

In this cause, tried without a jury, there are no findings of fact and law. In a colloquy between court and counsel at the conclusion of the trial the court stated his views upon one question in the case but no exception was taken to the opinion announced. There is nothing before us to review. Circuit Court Rule No. 45; sections 12586, 12587, 3 Comp. Laws 1915; Wilson v. Hugus, 163 Mich. 577 ; Sparling v. Smeltzer, 140 Mich. 461 ; Kooman v. DeJonge, 186 Mich. 292 ; Messer v. Dornbus, 210 Mich. 46 . And in such cases we cannot examine the testimony to see whether it supports the judgment. See McDonell v. Union Trust Co., 139 Mich. 386 , and cases there cited.

The judgment is affirmed.

Steers, C. J., and Moore, Fellows, Stone, Bird, and Sharpe, JJ., concurred. The late Justice Brooke took no part in this decision.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 5 cases

View all citing references →
1923: 21924: 11928: 11930: 119232026peak 1923 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Gervickes v. Royal Exchange Assurance Co.192 N.W. 654 (Mich. 1923)
  2. Michigan Central Railroad v. Morgan198 N.W. 967 (Mich. 1924)
  3. Mills v. General Discount Corp.222 Mich. 242 (1923)
  4. Maine v. Neuman233 N.W. 356 (Mich. 1930)
  5. Buitendorp v. Moore217 N.W. 792 (Mich. 1928)

Most recent

  1. Maine v. Neuman233 N.W. 356 (Mich. 1930)
  2. Buitendorp v. Moore217 N.W. 792 (Mich. 1928)
  3. Michigan Central Railroad v. Morgan198 N.W. 967 (Mich. 1924)
  4. Gervickes v. Royal Exchange Assurance Co.192 N.W. 654 (Mich. 1923)
  5. Mills v. General Discount Corp.222 Mich. 242 (1923)

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 5

DepthCaseCited by
McDonell v. Union Trust Co., 102 N.W. 953 (Mich. 1905) 11
Messer v. Dornbos, 177 N.W. 199 (Mich. 1920) 8
Kooman v. De Jonge, 152 N.W. 1016 (Mich. 1915) 7
Wilson v. Hugus, 128 N.W. 781 (Mich. 1910) 3
Sparling v. Smeltzer, 103 N.W. 1131 (Mich. 1905) 2

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