Portage Lake & Lake Superior Ship Canal Co. v. Haas
| Decision Date | 03 May 1870 |
| Citation | 20 Mich. 326 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | The Portage Lake and Lake Superior Ship Canal Co. v. Adam Haas |
Motion to dismiss an appeal.
The Portage Lake and Lake Superior Ship Canal Co., filed their petition in the Probate Court of Houghton County under the provisions of § 10, act No. 137 of the Laws of 1861, p. 207, and chap. 67 Comp. Laws, §§ 1962-1967, for the condemnation to the use of their canal, of lands belonging to Adam Haas. A jury was demanded by the respondent, and on the 20th day of August, 1869, damages were awarded to him of $ 6000. Their verdict was on the same day confirmed by the Probate Court. On the 7th day of October, following, the attorney of the petitioners gave notice of an appeal to this Court.
C. I. Walker now moves to dismiss the appeal on the ground, that it was not taken within twenty days,--the time limited therefor by the statute.--Comp. L. § 1967.
S. F. Seager, for the appellants, concedes the right to the dismissal on the ground stated; but insists that as the appeal was noticed for hearing at this term, by the appellee, and that in consequence thereof the appellant had, in good faith, prepared for the hearing by printing the record, no costs should be allowed.
OPINIONThe Court dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction, but without costs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Frost v. St. Paul Banking & Investment Co.
...& W. M. Ry. Co., 95 Mich. 473; Stolt v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 49 Minn. 353; Tierney v. Dodge, 9 Minn. 166; Portage Lake & L. S. S. C. Co. v. Haas, 20 Mich. 326. term "adverse party" includes everyone who is interested in the subject matter of the appeal and who will be affected by t......
-
Beaudry v. Burroughs Adding Mach. Co.
...unsuccessful, to ask a reversal in this court on the ground that the commission was without jurisdiction to hear it. In Portage Lake, etc., Co. v. Haas, 20 Mich. 326, it was said (syllabus): ‘When an appeal is not taken within the time fixed by statute, and there is not provision for enlarg......
-
Waterman v. Bailey
...and perfecting an appeal are deemed jurisdictional, and must be strictly complied with." This is the doctrine of this court. In Canal Co. v. Haas, 20 Mich. 326, it was said "when an appeal is not taken within the statutory time, and there is no provision for an extension, there is no jurisd......
-
City of Grand Rapids v. Chicago & W.M. Ry. Co.
...is a statutory one, and, the notice not having been given to all, the court has no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Portage Lake, etc., Co. v. Haas, 20 Mich. 326; Canfield v. The City of Erie, 21 Mich. People's Ice Co. v. The Excelsior, 43 Mich. 336, 5 N.W. 398. The appeal must be dismissed......