Case ID: mich_40/html/0174-01.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

James A. Lambert v. Abner J. Griffith et al.
    
      Practice — Case referred bach for clearer presentation.
    
    In a case involving accounts the parties made frequent references to certain partnership books which were not returned in whole or by sufficient transcript as part of the record. The references were therefore unintelligible, and as the court could not tell whether the case was presented as it had been below, it was referred back to the lower court that the parties might take, proper action to present it clearly.
    Appeal from Berrien.
    Submitted November 22, 1878.
    Referred back January 21, 1879.
    Foreclosure. The facts do not sufficiently appear in the record.
    
      Franklin Muzzy and George E. Clapp for complainant and appellant.
    
      Edward Bacon for defendants and appellees.
   Per Curiam.

In this case, counsel when taking testimony and also in the preparation of their briefs for argument in this court, referred to and treated the books of the firm as though they had been formally introduced in evidence, and used upon' the hearing in the court below. Yet they have not been returned to this court, and the references thereto in the briefs are of no assistance to us whatever. As the case comes here many of the accounts in dispute are left in very great doubt, notably so the claim for $1,000, which although not appearing upon the cash book, yet would seem, or at least a portion thereof, to have been paid out for the benefit of the firm. Under the circumstances we think it better to refer the case back to the circuit so that the parties may take such action as they may deem proper in order to present the case in a clearer ■ light, as we do not know that the case is presented here in the same way it was in the court below.