Case Name: POPE v. JUDGE OF RECORDER'S COURT
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1895-10-23
Citations: 107 Mich. 25
Docket Number: 
Parties: POPE v. JUDGE OF RECORDER’S COURT.
Judges: 
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 107
Pages: 25–26

Head Matter:
POPE v. JUDGE OF RECORDER’S COURT.
1. Bill of Exceptions — Settlement—Mandamus.
Mandamus will not lie to compel a trial judge to sign a bill of exceptions presented to him, where he avers the same to be incomplete and inaccurate; but upon the bill so presented, and the amendments offered thereto, he should settle such bill as he deems tó be proper.
2. Same — Exceptions in Criminal Case.
The respondent in a criminal case cannot be compelled to furnish a copy of the testimony as a prerequisite to the settlement of a bill of exceptions.
Mandamus by Nellie W. Pope to compel William W. Chapin, judge of the recorder’s court of Detroit, to sign a bill of exceptions.
Submitted October 22, 1895.
Denied October 23, 1895.
Henry M. Oheever and John Atkinson, for relator.
Allan H. Fraser, Prosecuting Attorney, and Henry A. Mandell, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
In this matter relator asks for an order requiring the respondent to sign the bill of exceptions which has been presented. We do not think that the relator is entitled to the order prayed. The recorder should, however, fix a day for the settlement of a bill of exceptions, and at such time he should proceed, upon the bill presented, and such amendments as may be offered by the prosecuting attorney, to consider the matter, and to settle such bill as in his judgment is proper. We do not think that the relator can be compelled to furnish a copy of the testimony in the cause.