Case ID: mich_27/html/0170-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Campbell, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People on the relation of William H. Stebbins v. The Judge of the Barry Circuit Court.
    
      Equity pleading and practice: Hearing: Mandamus. A circuit court cannot decline to hear a canse in chancery, where either party has regularly claimed a hearing in open court, unless an order has been made upon good cause shown, directing it to he proceeded in otherwise. Such a case may he placed on the docket, and a 'mandamus lies to compel the court to proceed in it as right and justice may require.
    
      Heard April 22.
    
    
      Decided April 24.
    
    Application for mandamus.
    
    
      George 0. Worth and 0. I. Walker, for the relator.
    
      I. A. Holbrook and W. E. Oheever, for the respondent.
   Campbell, J.

The mandamus in this case is asked for on the ground that the circuit judge declined to hear a cause that had been noticed for bearing in open court, and it is opposed on the ground that be has a discretion to make such refusal.

We think the statute does authorize the circuit court to make provision for' bearing cases otherwise than on testimony in open court. But this can only be by a special order, upon good cause shown. In the present case no such proceeding appears to have been had, and until it has been done, the statutory right remains unimpaired, and a refusal to hear the cause would not be justified.

The relator has a right to notice his canse for hearing, and, to have it placed upon the docket. A mandamus .should be allowed directing the circuit court to proceed in the cause, when so noticed, as right and justice may require.

Grates and Cooley, JJ., concurred.

Christiancy, Ch. J.: I concur in the result.