The Detroit times., 1911-05-30
JUDGE 10 BIAln WHEN lAwYERs
SIMPLY TAKE AWAY YOUR MONEY

for denying to him an inquiry into the
real injury he may have sustained
| The pleadings at common law did
both and the court sanctioned IL The
code attempts TO remedy this injus
| tice."
! The dlfficulties and intrieacies OF
pleading viii be. greatly simplified and
| justice promoted by applying the
spirit and substance OF these rules IN
the liberal manner intended by It's au
| thors.
Motions and demurrers galore are
filed before case is finally gotten M
issue. One-haif are merely for delay
and should be summarily disposed OF
The other half are about equally
divided between those OF clear merit
and doubtful merit. But II the spirit
OF the code be applied. courts will
have little diffieulty in determining
motions OF the usual order. all OF
which should be solely for the pur,
pose OF clarifying the issue.
Another tpo common class OF mo-
lions Is the motion for continuance OF
the case to- a subsequent term. This
Is matter generally resting In the
sound discretion OF the trial judge.
Ii should always be exercised in the
furtherance OF Justice, without denial
or delay. Continuances In the United
States courts are the exec Zion. In the
state courts too much the rule.
Manifestly, II the court Is in doubt
about the sufficiency OF the pleading,
objection should be sustained so that
the pleading may be mado proof
against legal attack In the higher
courts.
Jcsh Billings, though not lawyer.
Z laid down aNwholesome rule for coun-
sells guidancs In the following illus.
I tration: Il never believe in taking
7 foolish chances. II was ever called
upon to mourn liver dead mule.
i would stand 1T the head of IL
II would be well for trial courts and
counsel to follow this rule In pleading,
! so that no good cause shall finally
suffer by bad pleading. when by
amendment the same could have been
speedily, safely and surely cured.
Amendments should be literally al
lowed In the furtherance OF Justice at
any stage Of the case. This is not
only the spirit. but the express enact
ment OF the code.
! ImpaneIIng and Qualifying the Jury.
Let the trial Judge impanel the jury.
How many Of you have seen hours.
days and weeks wasted by petty, de-
tailed examination of jurors by coun-
sci.
There is no statutory rule provid-
ing who shall inquire OF the jury. IL
is purely In the discretion OF the
court. II the case be one OF import
ance the court can briefly state IL. and
then inquire briefly as to the knowi-
edge OF the jurors, first. as to the con-
| troyersy; second, as to the parties
and their counsel. covering the gen.
eral field of inquiry touching their
qualifications by reason Of knowledge,
relationship or any other fact or cir
cumstance important to the case.
The court, after excusing on his
own motion any one that may have
failed to qualify, passes the matter.
first, TO the plaintiffs counsel. and
/ then to the defendants for other and
\ further inquiries.
/ What good is accomplished by this7
| First, great time saved; second. jur-
| ors are impressed with the import
j ance OF being impartial-much more
SO than they do II the attorneys make
the inquiry; third. II relieves counsel
OF much embarrassment also In max
Ing inquiry and challenges.
/ am aware this Is a rather unusual
procedure in our courts, but IL 10 war
ranted not only by great saving OF
time, but by the law OF procedure.