Court Opinion

ID: 9712777
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 04:59:48.747786+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:14.332452
License: Public Domain

Black, J.
(concurring). Our order of June 28, 1961,* denied finally this manifestly dilatory petition for mandamus to compel continuance and change of venue. By our misfortunate order to show cause, issued upon that petition March 21, 1961, the proponent’s request below, for continuance “until some day subsequent to May 28, 1961,” has exceeded his most sanguine expectation.
In these collected circumstances I see no need for consideration of mooted rules relating to changes of venue. Whether the proponent will or will not be able to find some new cause for change of venue is outright speculation, and that we should leave for more pressing work of justiciable nature.
In the words of Mr. Justice Wiest (Attorney General, ex rel. Eaves, v. State Bridge Commission, 277 Mich 373, 386), I stand upon our order of June 28th “and, therefore, do not join in the expatiation.”

 “In this cause the prior order of this Court holding in abeyance the trial until the further order of this Court in the premises is terminated and set aside, and the order to show cause is vacated. It is further ordered that plaintiff's application for a writ of mandamus to compel the granting of a motion for a change of venue of the trial of the ease is denied; and the case is remanded to the circuit court of Muskegon county for further proceedings therein. An opinion covering the matter set forth herein will be filed later.”