Case ID: mich_246/html/0536-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "McDonald, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

COOK v. KENT CIRCUIT JUDGE.
    1. Exceptions, Bill of — Jurisdiction to Grant Extension of Time — Discretion of Court.
    Where, during the 20-day period following entry of judgment, a stenographer’s certificate was filed and further extension of time to settle a bill of exceptions was granted, the court retained jurisdiction, and thereafter further extensions rested in its discretion.
    2. Same — Good Cause por Granting Extension op Time.
    A sworn showing that the stenographer had not been able to complete a transcript of the record is good cause for granting an extension of time to settle a bill of exceptions, where the court has jurisdiction to grant it.
    3. Mandamus — Exceptions, Bill op — Extension op Time.
    Mandamus will issue, if necessary, directing the trial court to reinstate an order granting an extension of time to settle a bill of exceptions, where said order was vacated under a mistaken opinion that the court was without jurisdiction to grant it, although good cause therefor had been shown.
    Mandamus by Ray Gr. Cook and another to compel Major L. Dunham, Kent circuit judge, to set aside an order vacating a previous order granting extension of time to settle a bill of exceptions.
    Submitted January 8, 1929.
    (Calendar No. 33,967.)
    Writ granted March 29, 1929.
    
      Mason, Alexander & McCaslin and Clifford A. Mitts, for plaintiffs.
    
      William J. Landman, for defendant.
   McDonald, J.

The plaintiffs seek a writ of mandamus to compel the defendant to set aside ayi order vacating a previous order which granted an extension of time to settle a bill of exceptions in a cause entitled Armstrong v. Cook.

On March 12, 1928, judgment was rendered for the plaintiff. On the same day, a stay of 20 days was entered. On March 31,1928, the stenographer’s certificate was filed and a further stay of 20 days was granted. This stay expired on April 20, 1928. On April 23d, another stay of 20 days was ordered. On May 5,1928, a further extension of 60 days was entered. This stay expired on July 6, 1928. On June 29, 1928, a motion was made to set aside the order of May 5,1928. The motion was granted. An order vacating the order of May 5th was entered. The plaintiffs ask for a mandamus to compel the defendant to set aside his last order.

In setting aside the order of May 5th, the defendant was of the opinion that when that order was entered the court was without jurisdiction to settle a bill of exceptions. In this he was mistaken.

During the 20-day period following the entry of judgment, a stenographer’s certificate was filed and a further stay granted. By properly' securing an order during this period, the court retained jurisdiction and thereafter the matter of further extensions of time rested in its discretion. Walker v. Wayne Circuit Judge, 226 Mich. 393.

The court had jurisdiction to make the order of May 5th. He made it after a sworn showing that the stenographer had not been' able to complete a transcript of the record. This was good cause, and justified the extension granted. The record presents no reasonable excuse for vacating it.

If necessary, the writ of mandamus will issue.

North, C. J., and Fead, Fellows, Wiest, Clark, Potter, and Sharpe, JJ., concurred.