Maxwell v. Speed

Decided February 10, 1886

Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1886-02-10

Mandamus. Delator applied, by petition, for a writ of mandamus to compel the respondent to hold the service of a declaration valid, and vacate his order quashing such service and dismissing the suit commenced thereby, in the Wayne circuit court. The facts, as set up in the petition and not denied by respondent, are as follows: The relator is a resident of Wayne county and had resided therein, continuously, for ten years prior to making the application.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently June 1920

2 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““The plaintiff is entitled to have such an issue fairly presented and passed upon under such general or other plea as defendant shall legally resort to.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including De Velin v. Wayne Circuit Judge

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1886-02-10

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1Inasmuch as, under the statute, a foreign corporation having an agent served here may be held for a cause of action arising here, and service was had on such an agent in this case, we do not think a motion to quash the *40declaration was a proper remedy. The plaintiff is entitled to have such an issue fairly presented and passed upon under such general or other plea as defendant shall legally resort to. The declaration does not negative such a cause of action, as it is claimed by plaintiff; and, if there is such a defense, it must be disposed of so as to be open to review in the usual method at common law, by writ of error, based on the record or exceptions, if exceptions are settled so as to present it.

¶2A mandamus must issue to set aside the order to quash, with costs of motion.