Author Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1921 edition. Excerpt:... NOTES ON RECENT MICHIGAN CASES Appeal--Extens1on Of The Statutory Per1od--Mandamus--Plaintiff was summoned to appear in a summary proceeding before a circuit court commissioner. Unable to attend because of alleged illness, she gave her husband sufficient money to settle the claim and instructed him to make payment. Because of his failure to do as directed, judgment was rendered against her in the proceeding; and she was also prevented from taking an appeal within the period of right. Compiled Laws 1915, 14408, provides for an extension of the statutory period within which an appeal may be taken when the party has been prevented from taking the same by circumstances not under his control. Upon defendant's denial of her motion for leave to appeal from the judgment, plaintiff asked for a writ of mandamus compelling its allowance. Held, writ denied, for the dereliction of plaintiff's husband was not such a circumstance beyond her control as will authorize a belated appeal. Kowalsky v. Marschner, Circuit Judge (Mich., 1922), 191 N. W. 32. Generally, the time prescribed by statute for taking an appeal is regarded as jurisdictional and there can be no extension of the time unless such extension is authorized by statute. 3 Corpus Jur1s, 1069. Michigan, among other states, expressly authorizes an extension of time for certain causes. Klotz v. Lenawee Circuit Judge, 159 Mich. 639; Witham v. Clinton Circuit Judge, 159 Mich. 568; Bliss v. Saginaw Circuit Judge, 159 Mich. 507. While some jurisdictions allow an extension of time by stipulation or agreement of the parties: Goodwin v. Fox, 120 U. S. 775; Pipkin v. McArtan, 122 N. C. 194; this court follows the general rule in refusing to permit an extension of the statutory period by consent of...