Case ID: mich-pr_1/html/0032-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Helen A. Beadle, Administratrix, etc., v. The Island Cedar Company (A Corporation.)
    Writ of Error — Dismissal of for want of prosecution.
    
    Motion to dismiss writ of error and affirm the judgment below for failure of appellant to file with the clerk, in compliance with Supreme Court Rule No. 32 either before the first day of the October term, 1895, or of the January term, 1896, copies of the printed record in. the case, and for failure to serve a copy of said record and of appellant's brief as provided by Supreme Court Rule No. 59. Granted.
    
      George A, Cady and Horace M. Oren, for motion.
    
   The facts as shown by the record in the case and the affidavit of George A. Cady, one of plaintiff’s attorneys, filed in support of said motion, were:

a — That the writ of error was issued June 5, 1895, returnable July 15, 1895, an,d returned and filed July 19,1895.

b — That the case was noticed by the appellee for the October, 1895, term of Court, but was stricken from the docket,' copies of the printed record not having been filed; that on December 9, 1895, the appellee noticed the case for hearing for the January, 1896, term of court, and included in the notice a statement that in ease the printed record was not filed and served on or before the first day of said term, a motion to dismiss the writ of error and affirm the judgment sought to be reviewed would be made.

c — That no copy of the assignments of error has ever been served upon the appellee or her attorneys; that on January 7, 1896, the ease was stricken from the docket of the January, 1896, term of court; that no copies of the printed record have been filed, nor Jias the appellee or her attorneys received up to the time of making said affidavit (January 11, 1896) any copy of said record or of the brief for the appellant.