Harvey v. Stewart, 22.
| Decision Date | 16 September 1932 |
| Docket Number | No. 22.,22. |
| Citation | 244 N.W. 231,260 Mich. 66 |
| Parties | HARVEY v. STEWART et al. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Oakland County; Frank L. Doty, Judge, Presiding.
Action by Grace Harvey against Ralph Stewart and others. From order dismissing cause of action as to Ralph Stewart and the Chrysler Corporation, plaintiff appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
Argued before the Entire Bench.
R. M. Van Dyne, of Flint, for appellant.
Frederick J. Ward and Robert Plunkett, both of Detroit, for appellees.
Grace Harvey, plaintiff, was a resident of Flint in Genesee county, at the time she brought the instant suit in Oakland county against Jack Campbell, Ralph Stewart, and Chrysler Corporation, defendants. She seeks to recover damages for injuries she claims to have sustained in a collision in which the car she was riding in was struck both by the Oldsmobile car driven by Campbell and the Dodge car belonging to Chrysler Corporation and driven by Stewart. The accident happened in Oakland county of which she claims Campbell is a resident. In an amended declaration she claims the negligent operations of both the Oldsmobile and Dodge cars were co-operating and concurrent acts. Campbell was never served with the process. Stewart, a resident of Wayne county, and the Chrysler Corporation were both served in Wayne county. They entered their appearances and pleaded the general issue. After the filing of the amended declaration, they moved to dismiss, claiming that plaintiff was a resident of Flint, Stewart of New York state, and the Chrysler Corporation a foreign corporation; that the latter two were served with process in Wayne county; and that none of the parties, either plaintiff or defendants, are residents of Oakland county; that there was no joint liability on the part of defendants, and therefore the court had no jurisdiction. It is conceded that plaintiff is now a resident of Flint, but in the affidavit filed in opposition to the motion to dismiss, it is claimed that she was a nonresident of the state of Michigan at the time of the accident. Other questions of jurisdiction are also raised. Service was not obtained upon Campbell, and an order was entered dismissing the cause of action as to him. The trial judge also granted the motion to dismiss as to the other two defendants and plaintiff appeals from this order. Defendants Stewart and Chrysler Corporation appeared and answered the declaration by pleading the general issue. Under...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brashier v. J. C. O'Connor & Sons
...sees. 31 to 34; M. & O. R. R. Co. v. Swain, 164 Miss. 825, 145 So. 627; Neafsey v. Stone, 274 Mass. 235, 174 N.E. 278; Harvey v. Stewart, 260, Mich. 66, 244 N.W. 231; Lewis v. Esch, 279 N.Y.S. 77, 155 Misc. Anderson Clayton & Co. v. State ex rel. Allred, 122 Tex. 530, 62 S.W.2d 107; Arnett ......
-
Kruizenga v. Fuller
...806, §§ 5, 35; Morgan v. Hoey, 209 Mich. 655, 177 N.W. 200;Orlich v. Houghton Circuit Judge, 246 Mich. 487, 224 N.W. 610;Harvey v. Stewart, 260 Mich. 66, 244 N.W. 231;Lesher v. Bonner, 269 Mich. 124, 256 N.W. 827, do not sustain their contention that defendant waived the defense of the stat......
- Hawgood v. Howard's Estate, Motion No. 171
-
Lesher v. Bonner, 106.
...question of service upon motions for a new trial. The general appearance waived all irregularities in regard to service. Harvey v. Stewart, 260 Mich. 66, 244 N. W. 231. The judgment of the lower court is affirmed. Plaintiffs will recover costs from all the defendants with the exception of t......