History
  • No items yet
midpage
Simon v. Zarevich
213 Mich. 662
Mich.
1921
Check Treatment
Clark, J.

In this cause, tried without a jury, there are no findings of fact and law. In a colloquy between court and counsel at the conclusion of the trial the court stated his views upon one question in the case but no exception was taken to the opinion announced. There is nothing before us to review. Circuit Court Rule No. 45; sections 12586, 12587, 3 Comp. Laws 1915; Wilson v. Hugus, 163 Mich. 577; Sparling v. Smeltzer, 140 Mich. 461; Kooman v. DeJonge, 186 Mich. 292; Messer v. Dornbus, 210 Mich. 46. And in such cases we cannot examine the testimony to see whether it supports the judgment. See McDonell v. Union Trust Co., 139 Mich. 386, and cases there cited.

The judgment is affirmed.

Steers, C. J., and Moore, Fellows, Stone, Bird, and Sharpe, JJ., concurred. The late Justice Brooke took no part in this decision.

Case Details

Case Name: Simon v. Zarevich
Court Name: Michigan Supreme Court
Date Published: Mar 30, 1921
Citation: 213 Mich. 662
Docket Number: Docket No. 26
Court Abbreviation: Mich.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.