Volume 174 — Michigan Reports

<p>Error to Manistee; Withey, J.</p> <p>Assumpsit by the Manistee Navigation Company against the Louis Sands Salt & Lumber Company for breach of a contract. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.</p>

Assumpsit by the Sharpless Separator Company .against Ered Brown and another for the purchase price of goods sold to defendants. Judgment for defendants. Plaintiff brings error.

Assumpsit by the township of Deep River against Philip W. Van Antwerp for unpaid taxes on personal property. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

<p>1. Negligence — Street Railways —Collision —Highways — Gross Negligence — “Last Clear Change” — Discovered Negligence-Contributory Negligence.</p> <p>No right of recovery exists in a personal injury action if plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence, which was or could have been discovered by defendant in time to avert the accident, unless it also appears that defendant was chargeable with gross negligence.1</p> <p>2. Same — Definition.</p> <p>Gross negligence, as applied by this court in cases of discovered negligence, means either intentional failure to perform a manifest duty, in reckless disregard of the consequences, as affecting life or property, or, on the other hand, thoughtless disregard of consequences without the exercise of any effort to avoid them.</p> <p>3. Same — Gross Negligence — Contributory Negligence.</p> <p>Plaintiff could not recover under the rule where he was injured in a collision at a curve on defendant’s track which he attempted to drive across, after looking and failing to observe an approaching car, upon testimony not in dispute that the car moved but one foot after it struok his buggy, that he first observed the car when his horse was on the track, and the oar was alongside the rig, aind he had time after discovering the car to pull the horse off the track out of danger.</p>

<p>1. Insurance — Interpleader—Change of Beneficiary. In a suit for interpleader, evidence examined, and held, not sufficient to establish a change of beneficiary as claimed by one of the defendants.</p> <p>2. Variance — Equity—Answer—Pleading. Under a cross-bill charging that an alleged change of beneficiary was procured by duress, undue influence, and fraud, denying also averments of the cross-bill of other defendants who set up a change of beneficiary, and who did not urge the olaim of variance in the lower court where an amendment • might have been allowed, appellants were not entitled to relief on appeal, on the theory that the evidence showed forgery, not duress or undue influence.</p> <p>3. Costs — Interpleader. An allowance to the interpleading complainant out of the fund paid into court belonging to defendants, of $45, including costs paid and a solicitor fee of $30, was not unreasonable.</p>

<p>1. Contracts — Profit Sharing Agreement — Accounting—Evidence-Mines.</p> <p>Held, upon a consideration of conflicting testimony, that an oral agreement as claimed by complainant in his bill for accounting, to procure options on and develop adjoining mining properties and to share profits and expenses, was established by the evidence. Where oomplainant and defendant orally agreed to secure options on adjoining parcels of land containing mineral, to divide profits and expenses, and to interest capital in the development, and defendant procured an option on one of the parcels in his own name, cleared up the title, and obtained stock in a corporation which was organized to develop the mineral rights, defendant claiming that the particular piece of land was not included in the agreement, a bill for an accounting was the proper remedy, and was not open to the objection that it would enforce specifically an oral contract relating to real property.</p> <p>3. Same — Laches.</p> <p>Mere lapse of time, not accompanied by a change of defendant’s position to his disadvantage, would not bar complainant’s remedy, and a delay of six or more years, during which complainant supposed his interest in the property was recognized by defendant, and litigation over the title was in process, was insufficient to constitute laches as to complainant, who filed his bill within a year after discovering the true situation.</p>

Assumpsit by the American Seed Company against Charles E. Cole in justice’s court for money had and received. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appealed to the circuit court. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff brings error.

Summary proceedings by Ida B. Heintzen against Frank Gault and another for the recovery of possession of real property. From a judgment for complainant, defendants appealed. The circuit court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution.

Bill by Alonzo O. Freeman against the Lowell Specialty Company and others for an accounting. From a decree for complainant overruling a demurrer to the bill, said Lowell Specialty Company appeals.

Case by Clyde Squires by his next friend against the Michigan Bonding & Surety Company for the unlawful killing of plaintiff’s father while under the influence of intoxicants sold by a liquor dealer for whom defendant was surety. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff brings error.

<p>Error to Washtenaw; Kinne, J.</p> <p>Case by Frank W. Garlinghouse against the Michigan Central Railroad Company for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.</p>

Case by the Nelson Grain Company against the Ann Arbor Railroad Company for the wrongful delivery of goods shipped by plaintiff. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. This case was tried by the court without a jury.

Assumpsit by William Yeiter and Clarence W. Yeiter against Frank E. Campau for goods sold and delivered. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendant brings error. This action is in assumpsit.

<p>Error to Bay; Collins, J.</p> <p>Assumpsit by Rebecca Bryant against the Granite State Fire Insurance Company on a policy of insurance. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.</p>

Bill by J. L. Hudson Company against the No-Name Hat Company and others for an injunction restraining certain actions at law and other relief. From a decree for defendants, complainant appeals.

Leman A. Lyon presented a claim against the estate of Lucena A. Freshour, deceased, for services rendered as attorney. The claim was disallowed and claimant appealed to the circuit court. Judgment for plaintiff. M. Jay Minor, administrator, brings error.

Assumpsit in justice’s court by James W. Potter against Thomas J. Shields and another for breach of warranty of a steam boiler. Prom a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appealed to the circuit court. Judgment for plaintiff, defendants bring error.

<p>1. Trial — Argument—Appeal and Error — Jury. In an action tried by the court,without a jury, appellant, who neglected to avail himself of his right to present points of law to the court to be found, could not in the Supreme Court complain of the refusal of the trial judge to hear argument after the proofs had been closed.</p> <p>2. Same — Evidenoe—Compromise. The objection that evidence of a compromise made between the parties was incompetent under the pleadings, could not be raised for the first time on error.</p> <p>3. Same. A finding of the circuit court made on the testimony of one of the defendants tending to establish a contention of plaintiff, that the other defendant knew of and assented to a certain compromise agreement, was sufficiently supported:</p> <p>4. Compromise and Settlement — Contracts—Consideration. A contract of settlement between a client and his attorney whom he charged with having taken undue advantage of him and with procuring an unconscionable agreement as to fees, eto., abrogated the prior contract providing for unreasonable compensation, apd was supported by sufficient consideration.</p> <p>5. Same — Interest. Defendants should not be charged interest prior to the date of settlement on sums in their hands, to be repaid to the client pursuant to the compromise; interest should run only from the date of the settlement.</p>

Bill by William Mahar against the Grand Rapids Terminal Railway Company for the removal of a cloud on complainant’s title to land and for other relief. From a decree for complainant, defendant appeals.

<p>Error to Bay; Collins, J.</p> <p>Ejectment by John C. Arnold against John J. Brechtel. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.</p>

Bill by the Union Trust Company, special administrator of the estate of Christian Kirchberg, deceased, against William M. Kirchberg and others to set aside certain conveyances. From a decree dismissing the bill of complaint, complainant appeals. Pending proceedings to determine whether Christian Kirchberg, deceased, died testate or intestate, complainant was appointed special administrator of the estate.

<p>1„ Negligence — Contributory Negligence — Railroads.</p> <p>In an action for injuries received at a crossing of defendant railroad, plaintiff, whose husband was driving the conveyance in which she was riding and who drove on the track before a passing passenger train, was not chargeable with contributory negligence per se for not attempting to jump from the wagon, and while plaintiff was chargeable with the negligence of the driver, she could recover, if the defendant saw or should have seen the peril of the plaintiff in time to have averted the accident, in the exercise of ordinary care.</p> <p>2. Same — Gross Negligence.</p> <p>Even if the negligence imputed to her amounted to gross negligence, plaintiff was not precluded from recovering.</p> <p>3. Same — Subsequent Negligence.</p> <p>Evidence that plaintiff’s husband drove on defendant’s track in the view of an approaching train, that as the team reached the rails they became frightened by an explosive discharge of steam from the locomotive, that they turned so as to cramp the wheel under the wagon and, notwithstanding the driver’s efforts to force them across the track, the horses were beyond his control and plaintiff was struck and injured, that the engineer was seen to be looking ahead at the time the train approached the crossing and, at a distance of 150 or 200 feet, waved or motioned in some manner to the driver, that from the time the horses stopped on the track, 18 or 20 seconds elapsed until the rig was struck, that the train was moving at the rate of about 8 or 10 miles an hour and no slackening of speed was observed by plaintiff’s witnesses before the collision, with further evidence tending to show negligence, held, to present a question for the jury as to defendant’s “subsequent” negligence.</p> <p>4 Same — Gross Negligence.</p> <p>Whenever a defendant sees a person in danger or by exercising only ordinary care in the discharge of his duty should discover such danger in time to avert an injury and either fails after discovering it to take steps to avert it, or fails to discover the danger, the fact that plaintiff's danger arose in the first instance because of his own negligence does not prevent him from recovering.1</p> <p>5. Same — Weight of Evidence.</p> <p>In view of the rule that a verdict should not be reversed for the reason that it is contrary to the weight of the evidence, unless it is contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence, it cannot be held as a matter of law that the court should have granted the motion for a new trial.</p> <p>6. Damages — Personal Injuries.</p> <p>A verdict of 525,000 in favor of a married woman 37 years of age, the wife of a common laborer, for the loss of her left hand and part of the arm, loss of the left foot and a severe scalp wound over the eye, nervous shock and attendant pain and injuries, plaintiff’s husband having been killed in the accident, is excessive and should be reduced to 517,000.</p> <p>Brooke and MoAlvay, JJ., dissenting.</p>

, presiding. Bill by Alonzo Yates against Clinton McGahen and Monroe McGahen for a decree in aid of execution. From a decree for defendants, complainant appeals.

<p>Exceptions before sentence from Ingham; Oollingwood, J.</p> <p>Byron Driver was convicted of violating the local-option law.</p>

<p>Error to Calhoun; North, J.</p> <p>Ejectment by Rosette I. Tuthill against Frank Katz and Frederick Katz. Judgment for defendants. Plaintiff brings error.</p>

<p>1. Corporations — Injunction—Equity—Telephones.</p> <p>In a suit to enjoin the consolidation of several telephone companies, which were not represented to be engaged in interstate business, the bill setting up no violation of the Sherman anti-trust act (26 U. S. Stat. 209, TJ. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 3200), did not warrant the interposition of the court of chancery on that ground, and presented no Federal question.</p> <p>2. Equity — Jurisdiction.</p> <p>Grievances which afflict the community must be redressed by those to whom the law has intrusted the duty of interference; private persons may not assume the right to institute proceedings in chancery to redress grievances on behalf of the public; and unless their private rights are interfered with, in a manner distinct from the wrong to the publio at large, equity has no jurisdiction.</p> <p>3. Telegraphs and Telephones — Parties—Injunction.</p> <p>A telephone company may not maintain a bill to restrain the Michigan railroad commission from authorizing the consolidation of other telephone companies operating in the same- or adjacent territory, if complainant’s interests are not shown to be peculiarly affected in a manner different from other members of the community; only the attorney general can enjoin the merger.</p> <p>4. Words and Phrases — Definitions—“Regulate.”</p> <p>The word “regulate” as used in the title of Act No. 138, Pub.</p> <p>" Acts 1911 (3 How. Stat. [2d Ed.] § 7222 etseq.), “An act to-declare telephone lines and telephone companies within the State of Michigan to be common carriers and to regulate the same and prescribing a penalty for the violation of this act,” includes both government and restriction and is sufficiently broad to include regulation of operation, etc.</p> <p>5. Constitutional Law — Title.</p> <p>Accordingly Act No. 138, Pub. Acts 1911 (3 How. Stat. [2d Ed.] § 7222 et seq.), is constitutional and its title is sufficient. Const, art. 5, § 21.</p>

Case by George Coleman against the Turner Cartage Company for personal injuries. A judgment for defend- . ant, on a verdict directed by the court, is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error. Plaintiff, a man 35 years of age, had been engaged for about 15 years with various truck companies in the city of Detroit. Defendant is a truck company, and for the past six or seven years has undertaken “heavy work;” that is, the moving of heavy or bulky objects.

Assumpsit in justice’s court by Clarence Rothschild against the Sugar Beet Products Company for goods sold and delivered. Prom a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appealed to the circuit court. Judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court. Plaintiff brings error.

Case by Augustus F. Whitcher against the Detroit United Railway for personal injuries. A judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.

<p>1. Trial — Appeal prom Justice’s Court — Conduct op Counsel.</p> <p>On the trial of an appeal from justice's court it was not reversible error to ask of a witness whether the jury in justice’s court had not passed on one of the issues to be tried, the question being objected to and the objection sustained.</p> <p>2. Same — New Trial — Motions.</p> <p>Held that the verdict in an action of replevin was not contralto the weight of the evidence.</p>

Bill by Reuben W. Putnam and another against the Pere Marquette Railroad Company for an accounting and injunction against removing the top soil from premises used as a gravel pit. From an order overruling a demurrer to the bill of complaint, defendant appeals. Complainants, by deed, conveyed to defendant certain rights in a piece of real estate to be used as a gravel pit.

Bill by the New York Life Insurance Company against Gussie Hamburger for cancellation of a policy of life insurance. From an order sustaining a plea supported by a sworn answer, complainant appeals.

Rill by Isaac Smith against Rose Mathis and Edward Mathis for specific performance of a contract for the sale of land. From a decree for defendants, complainant appeals.

<p>1. Animals — Words and Phrases — Birds—Statutes.</p> <p>Under 3 Comp. Laws, § 5593 (2 How. Stat. [2d Ed.] § 4362), for double damages in case of injuries done by a dog to “ sheep, lambs, swine, cattle or other domestic animal,” a declaration setting up injuries done by defendant’s dog to plaintiff’s turkeys, was not demurrable.</p> <p>2. Same — Definition.</p> <p>An animal is any animate being, which is not human, endowed with the power of voluntary motion.</p>

Bill by Charles E. Soule against the city of Grand Haven for the vacation of a tax lien for a special assessment. Prom a decree for defendant dismissing the bill, complainant appeals.

Bill to remove cloud from title by Peter C. Northouse against the city of Grand Haven. Prom a decree dismissing the bill, complainant appeals.

Bill by the Grand Haven Basket Factory against the City of Grand Haven to remove a tax lien from land of complainant as a cloud on his title. From a decree for defendant, complainant appeals.

Bill by Cornelius Yan Zanten against the city of Grand Haven to vacate a tax lien as a cloud on complainants’ title. From a decree dismissing the bill, complainant appeals. In the year 1911 the defendant city took certain proceedings under the statute (1 Comp. Laws, § 3192 et seq., 2 How. Stat. [2d Ed.] § 5714), to pave Seventh street in said city.

Francis Ganun presented for probate the last will of Nathan Ganun, which was contested by Addison Ganun and Newman J. Ganun. From an order of the probate court granting the petition, contestants appealed to the circuit court. Judgment for contestants. Proponent brings error.

Mandamus by the American Automobile Insurance Company, of St. Louis, Missouri, against C. A. Palmer, insurance commissioner of the State of Michigan, to compel respondent to rescind an official ruling that relator should suspend personal liability insurance on automobiles.

Case by Leonard Meóla, administrator of the estate of Antonio Tabaracci, deceased, against the Quincy Mining Company for the unlawful killing of plaintiff’s intestate. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. Plaintiff is administrator of the estate of one Antonio Tabaracci, who on December 8, 1908, was instantly killed in defendant’s mine. Decedent lost his life through coming in contact with a loosened trolley wire carrying a lethal current.

Assumpsit by the Rochester Distilling Company against the Traverse City Brewing Company for goods sold and delivered. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

<p>Exceptions before sentence from Hillsdale; Chester, J.</p> <p>William J. Boyd was convicted of obstructing the administration of justice.</p>

<p>Error to Cheboygan; Shepherd, J.</p> <p>Peter J. Bilitzke was convicted of offering a bribe to the prosecuting attorney of Cheboygan county.</p>

<p>Exceptions before sentence from Montcalm; Davis, J.</p> <p>Ernest Hatinger was convicted of violating the local-option law.</p>

<p>Divorce — Alimony.</p> <p>From property of defendant worth upwards of §9,000, it was not an excessive award to decree the payment of §3,500 alimony and §25 monthly for the support of the two children of the age of 6 and 7 years respectively, although complainant had no property when she married defendant, and his property had not materially increased thereafter.</p>

Case by Dan Bowsher; as administrator of the estate of Lillie Bowsher, deceased, against the Grand Rapids & Indiana Railway Company for the negligent killing of decedent. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

<p>Master and Servant — Duty to Protect Servant — Negligence</p> <p>—Personal Injuries.</p> <p>Defendant, having undertaken to carry the plaintiff, an employó, by boat to the place where he was to work, and being compelled to put him ashore at another point, owed plaintiff a duty to direct him by a safe route to the boarding house conducted by defendant, to which plantiff was sent, and it was for the jury to determine whether the duty was properly performed, by sending plaintiff along a tramway in the dark in charge of a man with a lantern in suoh manner that plaintiff was unable to see the width of the tramway and stepped off while attempting to make way for a car running on the structure.1</p>

Petition by William Van Dyke to secure an order compelling certain witnesses, Alfred J. Doughty and others, to give testimony under letters rogatory issued by the district court of Polk county, Iowa. An order requiring the witnesses to answer is reviewed by them on writ of certiorari.

<p>Exceptions before sentence from the superior court of Grand Rapids; Stuart, J.</p> <p>Harry Singer was convicted of assault.</p>

Replevin by Levi O. Smith and another, copartners as L. O. Smith & Company, against Henry Kistler, for a quantity of coal taken under an execution by defendant acting as constable. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiffs bring error.

Case-made from the superior court of Grand Rapids; Stuart, J. Case by Nina L. Daugherty against William S. Thomas, Claude H. Gress, Albert G. Williams, James E. Austin, and Walter S. Austin, for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant Thomas brings error.

Replevin by Pauline Freda, special administratrix of the estate of August Tishbein, deceased, against Sophie Tishbein and August Tishbein, Jr., for a stock of merchandise. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendants bring error.

Assumpsit by Norman Friedenwald against Joe Welch for broker’s commissions. A judgment for plaintiff on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by defendant on writ of error.

Mandamus by the Economy Power Company against C. Howard Baskam, register of deeds of Calhoun county, to compel respondent to receive for record a mortgage. The lower court refused the writ. Relator brings certiorari. Relator reviews by certiorari an order made by the circuit judge of Calhoun county refusing to issue a writ of mandamus against respondent. The relator is a Michigan corporation.

<p>Error to Van Burén; Des Voignes, J.</p> <p>A.ssumpsit by A. F. Baird against Oliver R. Salnave and another upon a promissory note. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendants bring error.</p>

<p>Trial — Rebuttal—Evidence—Order op Proof.</p> <p>In an action for injuries sustained by defendant’s trolley pole falling on plaintiff, in the highway, it was not error to permit the plaintiff, who had offered no direct evidence of negligence, to show on rebuttal that the falling of the pole was not due, as defendant’s evidence had tended to show, to the fact that the arm of a steam shovel caught a span wire and broke the pole; it was within the court’s discretion to permit the introduction on rebuttal of evidence that should have been offered as a part of plaintiff’s case.</p>

Bill by William Brinen against the Muskegon Savings Bank for an adjudication of complainant’s and defendant’s conflicting claims or liens on certain stock. From a decree for defendant, complainant appeals.

Assumpsit by Harrison S. Way against Herbert L. Boot for breach of a contract to convey land to plaintiff’s assignor. . Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

Bill by Leonard Weiss against Alma Weiss for divorce. From a decree making provision as to the custody of the children, both parties appeal.

Bill by Frederick T. Ranney against Otto Stoll, register of deeds for Wayne county, for an injunction restraining defendant from recording certain instruments. From an order dissolving a temporary injunction, complainant appeals.

<p>Intoxicating Liquors — Criminal Law — Local Option — Number op Saloons.</p> <p>Under an information charging respondent with engaging in business as a liquor dealer in a village where only one saloon was authorized by Act No. 291, Pub. Acts 1909 (2 How. Stat. [2d Ed.] § 5093), another liquor dealer having first secured a license during the year, and respondent obtaining a subsequent permit, no proof should have been received that local option had been adopted in the county in 1910, and had been repealed in 1912, without averments to such effect in the information ; it was insufficient to charge that the issuance of a license to respondent was “illegal and contrary to the provisions of Act No. 313, Pub. Acts 1887, as amended,” and that the village contained less than 500 population: the adoption of prohibition and subsequent repeal were material elementa of the offense to be alleged and proven.</p>

Mandamus by Walter Yeomans against the board of supervisors of Ionia county to compel respondent to levy an assessment to pay a drain construction order. An order allowing the writ is reviewed by respondent on writ of certiorari.

<p>Street Railways — Negligence — Personal Injuries — Highways and Streets — Duty to Use Care.</p> <p>Applying the rule that a motorman is not limited to avoiding a collision on the track when horses become frightened by the operation of the car, but must guard, so far as possible, against injury to others resulting from such frightened animals, whether on or off the tracks, it is held, in a case brought to recover for the motorman’s negligence in operating the car and frightening a horse by the loud ringing of the bell, that there was no evidence of gross or wanton negligence as claimed by plaintiff.1</p>

Mandamus by Fred W. De Foe against Horace Tupper and others, as the board of election commissioners for the city of Bay City, to compel respondents to print the name of relator as candidate for mayor of the National Progressive party on the official ballot.

Mandamus by Alvah W. Brown and others against the board of election commissioners of Kent county to prevent respondents from placing the names of certain candidates for county road commissioner on the ballot. An order denying the writ* is reviewed by relators on writ of certiorari.

Mandamus by William A. Livingstone and Carl Bauer against the board of election commissioners of Wayne county to require said board to print constitutional amendments to be voted on at the spring election on separate or distinct ballots. An order denying the writ is reviewed by relators on writ of certiorari.

Case by Anna Gornetzky against Harris Gornetzky and Matilda Gornetzky for alienating the affections of plaintiff’s husband. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendants bring error.

Bill by William N. Hunt against Una Stevens and others to quiet title to certain lands. From a decree for complainant defendants appeal.

Assumpsit by tbe Steering Wheel Company against the Fee Electric Car Company for the price of goods sold and delivered. Judgment for plaintiff on a directed verdict. Defendant brings error.

Case by John Mead and George Mead, copartners as Mead & Company, against the Michigan Central Railroad Company for damages to property resulting from a grade separation. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant brings error.

Bill by the Grand Rapids & Indiana Railroad Company against the Grand Rapids, Kalkaska & Southeastern Railroad Company and Pere Marquette Railroad Company for an accounting and other relief. From an order overruling a demurrer to complainant’s bill, defendants appeal.

<p>Error to Wayne; Murphy, J.</p> <p>Ejectment by William H. Graham against the city of Detroit. Judgment for defendant upon a directed verdict. Plaintiff brings error.</p>

Bill by Homer Kimball against Estella Batley and others for specific performance of a parol contract to convey lands. From a decree for complainant, defendants appeal.

<p>Error to Tuscola; Beach, J.</p> <p>Case by Diedrich H. Rohks against the township of Fairgrove for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.</p>

Bill by Rae Levitan against the Houghton National Bank. Defendant filed a plea to the jurisdiction, which the court sustained, dismissing the bill. Complainant, appeals.

<p>Error to Wayne; Codd, J.</p> <p>Assumpsit by David A. Gordon against Frank O’Neill and Marion O’Neill, for money had and received. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendants bring error.</p>

Case by Adelpha B. Loehr as administratrix of the estate of Edwin A. Loehr, deceased, against Charles E. Abell for the negligent killing of plaintiff’s intestate. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

Bill by George E. Koch against C. Fred Bird and another for reformation of a land contract and deed. From a decree for complainant, defendants appeal.

Garnishment proceedings in justice’s court by the Clay Lumber Company against George Steffens and Charles Steffens as garnishee of the Hart’s Branch Coal Company, principal defendant. From a judgment for defendants plaintiff appealed to the circuit court. Judgment for plaintiff and said garnishees bring error.

<p>Error to Bay; Collins, J.</p> <p>Case by Herbert B. Drake against the Industrial Works for personal injuries. A judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.</p>

Bill by Robert P. Minnis against Newbro-Gallogly Company for an injunction against breach of a lease and other equitable relief. From an order sustaining a demurrer to the bill, complainant appeals.

<p>Error to Bay; Collins, J.</p> <p>Case by Alberta P. Pearll against the city of Bay City for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.</p>

Case by James Goosen by his next friend against the Packard Motor Car Company for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

<p>Certiorari to Ingham; Collingwood, J.</p> <p>Habeas corpus by Nina L. Robinson against George Graham and Lydia Graham to determine the right of custody to George Graham Gould, an infant. An order awarding the custody of the child to petitioner is reviewed by respondents on writ of certiorari.</p>

Case by George F. Case against Frederick T. Ranney for negligent loss of property by foreclosure of a mortgage on which defendant neglected or failed to pay rents collected as plaintiff’s attorney or agent. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

<p>Error to Shiawassee; Miner, J.</p> <p>Case by Etta Schroeder against the Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Company for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.</p>

Assumpsit in justice’s court by Peter Swantek against Stephan Jarmozski for services rendered. Defendant appealed to the circuit court and later took out a writ of certiorari. The Supreme Court having held the writ of certiorari void, plaintiff moved in the lower court to dismiss and demand a judgment for costs previously paid by him to defendant to avoid execution levy. An order denying such relief is reviewed by plaintiff on writ of error.

Case by George A. Stoll, administrator of the estate of Stella Barbara Stoll, deceased, against Herman Laubengayer for the negligent killing of decedent. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. In the city of Ann Arbor, Lincoln street runs east and west. At its westerly terminus it intersects with Main street. From Main street running easterly there is a considerable downward grade.