Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

57 Ala. 410

Sherry v. Priest

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided December 15, 1876

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1876-12-15

Heard before the Hon. E. M.'Keils. This proceeding grew out of an appeal case from a justice-of the peace of Barbour county, to the City Court of Eufaula, in which case the present appellee was plaintiff, and' one Mathew Pryne defendant. On the trial of such case, de novo, in the City Court, the defendant consented to a verdict and judgment against himself for the costs, the plaintiff remitting the damages claimed in the suit.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently December 1916

2 state decisions

Relies on Pryor v. Beck · McKeen v. Nelms · McBarnett v. Breed

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1876-12-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

STONE, J.

¶1The appeal bond in this case was in the-penalty of fourteen dollars. The court below gave judgment against defendant and his sureties on the appeal bond, for all the costs, which were taxed by the clerk at $170. A motion was made in the court below to amend the judgment,, nuno pro tuno, so as to limit the judgment against the sureties to fourteen dollars, the penalty of the bond. The City Court overruled the motion, and permitted the judgment to stand as rendered. It was both the power and duty of the court below to entertain the motion, and make the correction. — 1 Brick. Dig. 78, et seq., §§ 144, 150, 152, 170, 176.

¶2The* City Court erred in rendering judgment against the-sureties for a greater sum than the penalty of the appeal bond, and that court should have corrected the error when moved thereto.—McBarnett v. Breed, 6 Ala. 476; Witherington v. Brantley, 18 Ala. 197; McKeen v. Nelms, 9 Ala. 510; Hill v. Rushing, 4 Ala. 212 ; Pryor v. Beck, 21 Ala. 397.

¶3Motion having been made in the court below to correct, this error, and that motion having been overruled, this court-will reverse the decision so rendered on the motion.—Rev. Code, § 2807; Warfield v. The State, 34 Ala. 261.

¶4Judgment of the City .Court reversed, and here rendered, limiting the recovery against the sureties on the appeal bond,, to fourteen dollars of the costs. Let the appellee pay the-costs of this appeal.

/57/ala/410 · .json · Public domain