Case ID: mich_147/html/0424-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

LYLE v. SHERMAN.
    Mandamus — Jurisdiction—Stenographer’s Transcript of Evidence.
    An application for a writ of mandamus to compel a circuit court stenographer to deliver a transcript of testimony on payment or tender of the statutory fees therefor should be made to the circuit court, and not to the Supreme Court.
    Mandamus by Clarence M. Lyle to compel Harvey A. Sherman, official stenographer of the 36th judicial circuit, to deliver a transcript of testimony.
    Submitted January 22, 1907.
    (Calendar No. 22,099.)
    Writ denied March 5, 1907.
    Respondent is the official stenographer of the Thirty-Sixth judicial circuit, and refuses to deliver to relator, an attorney at law, the transcript of the testimony of certain witnesses in a case in which relator is counsel, except upon payment of his legal fees therefor and in addition thereto a fee of $5 for taking stenographic notes of the argument of one of the opposing counsel in said cause at relator’s request. Relator prays an order requiring respondent to show cause why a peremptory mandamus should not issue requiring respondent to deliver the transcript of testimony aforesaid on payment or tender of the statutory fees therefor.
    
      Smith & Lyle, for relator.
    
      Thomas J. Cavanaugh, for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

The application for writ of mandamus in this matter is denied, for the reason that the matter should first be passed on by the circuit judge. Doubtless the circuit court will grant the writ, to which we think relator entitled,«upon application, leaving the respondent to his legal remedy, so far as the disputed charge is concerned, for which the statute does not provide.