Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

19 Ark. 228

Burton v. Feild

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided July 15, 1857

Supreme Court of Arkansas · decided 1857-07-15

<p>It is not the practice of this Court to require terms of the defendant in affirming the judgment, where the error complained of has been cured by an amendment of the record of the Circuit Court, and then the transcript perfected by certiorari.</p>

Decided 1857-07-15

Mr. Chief Justice English

¶1delivered the opinion of the Court.

¶2Feild & Dolly brought an action of debt against Patrick P. Burton, in tbe Pulaski Circuit Court. The defendant was described by that name both in the declaration and the writ, but the sheriff returned the writ served upon Phillip P. Burton. The plaintiffs obtained judgment by default, and the defendant brought error, assigning for cause of reversal the misnomer in the sheriff’s return. The defendants in error, before joinder, by leave of the Court below, caused the sheriff to amend his return, and then, by certiorari from this Court, brought up the amended record, by which the error assigned has been cured.

¶3The counsel for the plaintiff in error insists that, in affirming the judgment, under the circumstances, it should be done upon the terms of taxing the defendants in error with the costs, and requiring them to release the recognizance, as in case of affirmance on remittitur.

¶4Cases have frequently occurred in this Court where the only error complained of has been cured by an amendment, as in this case, and the practice has been to affirm without terms,

¶5The judgment is affirmed.

/19/ark/228 · .json · Public domain