
    Uri Raymond v. Samuel Hinckson and another.
    
      Notice of 'motion: Computation of time: Usual route of travel. The usual route of travel must govern in the computation of the time required, to he given hy rule in the service of notices.
    
      Heard and decided July 9th.
    
    Motion for re-hearing.
    
      P. P. Pratt, for defendants.-
    Objected that the notice of the hearing of this motion was not for a sufficient length of time under rule 26; Hillsdale, where it was served being over one hundred miles from Lansing by the usual route of travel, which was by railroad.
    
      W. T. Mitchell, for plaintiff:
    Claimed that the actual distance must determine, and that there being regular svagon roads between the points, they must regulate the distance. , ,,
   The court held that the usual route',.0‘f travel must govern, and that being over one hundrgd^jfules by,. rgilfoUd, the plaintiff must comply with the rule;-.^  