Michigan Supreme Court, 1906

Duryea v. Raymond

Michigan Supreme Court · Decided December 3, 1906 · Blair, Grant, Hooker, Montgomery, Ostrander

146 Mich. 488; 109 N.W. 851; 1906 Mich. LEXIS 935

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Butcher v. Cappon & Bertsch Leather Co. (Mich. 1907)

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

Montgomery, J.

The question which this record presents is whether an affidavit in garnishment, made by an attorney, which states that the plaintiff (not the affiant) is justly apprehensive of a loss of the debt unless a writ of garnishment issue, is sufficient' to confer jurisdiction to issue the writ, or subject to amendment. These questions must be answered in the negative, on the authority of Weimeister v. Manville, 44 Mich. 408. That case is in point, was decided a quarter of a century ago, and has never been modified, although it was distinguished *489from the case then under consideration in Williams v. Stock Board, 99 Mich. 80.

The circuit judge followed the ruling in Weimeister v. Manville, and his judgment is affirmed.

Grant, Blair, Ostrander, and Hooker, JJ., concurred.

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