Case ID: mich_109/html/0186-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Grant, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CODDE v. MAHIAT.
    Equity—New Trial—Res Judicata.
    Equity will not relieve a party against a judgment at law, and grant a new trial, upon the ground that the verdict was obtained by perjury on the part of the prevailing party, after a motion for a new trial has been denied by the court which rendered the judgment, and such denial has been affirmed on appeal. Gray v. Barton, 62 Mich. 186, followed.
    Appeal from Wayne; Lillibridge, J.
    Submitted April 21, 1896.
    Decided April 28, 1896.
    Bill by August Codde against Mary Mahiat to set aside a judgment, and for a new trial. From a decree dismissing the bill on demurrer, complainant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    The defendant, Mahiat, obtained judgment against the complainant for breach of promise of marriage, which was affirmed in this court. Mahiat v. Codde, 106 Mich. 387. Upon appeal to this court, complainant gave no bond to stay execution. Execution was issued, some real estate of the complainant levied upon, and sold. After the affirmance by this court, complainant filed this bill in equity to set aside the sale and judgment, and to obtain a new trial. The basis upon which he seeks relief is that the verdict was obtained by perjury on the part of the defendant. He now claims to have discovered new evidence, to the effect that the defendant stated to other parties that she was not engaged to complainant, had no love or affection for him, and would not marry him. Attached to the bill are two affidavits, in which the affiants make oath that they heard her make such statements. A demurrer was interposed, sustained, and the bill dismissed.
    
      Oscar M. Springer (H. H. Hatch, of counsel), for complainant.
    
      William Stacey, for defendant.
   Grant, J.

(after stating the facts). Gray v. Barton, 62 Mich. 186, rules this case. It is so nearly identical in its facts and circumstances with this that we deem any further statement or discussion unnecessary.

The decree is affirmed, with costs.

Montgomery,' Hooker, and Moore, JJ., concurred. Long, C. J., did not sit.