Michigan Supreme Court, 1900

Daschke v. Schellenberg

Michigan Supreme Court · Decided May 2, 1900

124 Mich. 16; 82 N.W. 665; 1900 Mich. LEXIS 457

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Kerr v. Rupp (Mich. 1906)
Flynn v. Holmes (Mich. 1905)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

A motion is made to dismiss an appeal from an order overruling a demurrer in chancery. Two grounds are urged:

1. That the order was not an appealable one.

2. That no bond was given.

The statute authorizes an appeal from an order overruling a general demurrer. 1 Comp. Laws 1897, § 549. The rule requiring a specification of cause in all demurrers does not abrogate or enlarge this statute. Appeals may still be taken from an order overruling a demurrer which prior to the rule might have been general. Greenley v. *17Hovey, 115 Mich. 504 (73 N. W. 808); Robinson v. Kunkleman, 117 Mich. 193 (75 N. W. 451). The ground of demurrer assigned is that the bill was not sworn to. This might have been ground for a general demurrer prior to the adoption of the present rule. 1 Daniell, Ch. Prac. (6th Am. Ed.) 587; 6 Enc. Pl. & Prac. 410.

By an amendment to the statute (1 Comp. Laws 1897, § 550) in 1899, a hond on an appeal is not required, except where a stay of proceedings is sought. Act No. 243, Pub. Acts 1899.

The motion must be denied.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.