¶1The observation of the defendant’s counsel takes this case out of the general rule. The order to stay proceedings was applied for, and evinces, that the joinder was amere matter ■of precaution, not a reliance on, or affirmance of, the correctness of the proceedings. The amendment therefore must be allowed, on payment of the costs'’of the assignment of errors, and those of resisting this application.^
3 Cai. Cas. 83
Moore v. Bacon
Decided May 15, 1805
New York Supreme Court · decided 1805-05-15
<p>A clerical misprision in a return to a certiorari may be amended after joinder in error, when it appears to have been served to prevent the entry of a default, for want of being served with an order to stay proceedings, then applied for, and expected, but it will be allowed only on paying costs of the assignment, and resisting the application to amend.</p>
Decided 1805-05-15