Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

41 Mich. 263

Townsend v. Tudor

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1879

Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1879-07-01

<p>Entry of judgment on transcript — Error—Certiorari.</p> <p>Entry of judgment on a transcript from a justice is not reviewable-on writ of error: nor is the denial of a motion to vacate sucb judgment. If such proceedings are reviewable at all, it is bycertiorari.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently October 1923

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1879-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Graves, J.

¶1Tudor got judgment against plaintiffs in error before a justice on a promissory note, and as both sides claim, obtained a transcript and caused judgment. *264to be entered on it in the circuit court. Subsequently tbe plaintiffs in error made a motion in that court to vacate the judgment on the ground that there were jurisdictional errors in the proceedings before the justice, and the court denied the motion. They thereupon brought this writ of error to review that decision. The judgment entered on the transcript is not returned, and since the entry of judgment in that way, as ordered by the statute, involves no judicial action by the circuit court reviewable on writ of error, it could not have been examined in this proceeding if it had been returned, and it is well settled that the decision of a mere motion .like that in question cannot be so re-examined. When •such proceedings are reviewable at all, the remedy is •certiorari and not writ of error. Although the objections made cannot be passed on, we find no difficulty in saying that looking at the whole record they do not seem áo have any force.

¶2The writ of error should be dismissed with costs.

.The other Justices concurred.
/41/mich/263 · .json · Public domain