Case Name: HOSFORD v. GRATIOT CIRCUIT JUDGE
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1902-01-07
Citations: 129 Mich. 302
Docket Number: 
Parties: HOSFORD v. GRATIOT CIRCUIT JUDGE.
Judges: 
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 129
Pages: 302–303

Head Matter:
HOSFORD v. GRATIOT CIRCUIT JUDGE.
1. Adultery — Withdrawal op Complaint — Dismissal.
A prosecution for adultery should be dismissed at the request of the complaining party, even after information filed.
2. Mandamus — Interlocutory Orders.
Mandamus will not lie to review an interlocutory order, whether in a civil or a criminal proceeding.
Mandamus by May Hosford to compel George P. Stone, circuit judge of Gratiot county, to dismiss a prosecution against her for adultery.
Submitted December 30, 1901.
Writ denied January 7, 1902.
Sawyer & Pettit, for relator.
Julius B. Kirby, Prosecuting Attorney, for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Relator was arrested on complaint of her husband, charging her with adultery, and is confined in prison awaiting trial. The husband filed a paper stating facts very similar to those in People v. Dalrymple, 55 Mich. 519 (22 N. W. 20). Upon filing such paper, relator moved that the proceedings be dismissed and she be discharged. The court denied the motion, holding that the husband, the complaining party, could not control the suit after it was once begun.
The court was certainly in error under the case above cited, and should have granted the motion. This, however, is not the proper proceeding to raise the question. We have steadily refused to entertain motions to review interlocutory orders of courts in both civil and criminal cases, and cannot make this an exception. Undoubtedly the circuit judge, upon the renewal of the motion, will grant it and discharge the relator.