¶1We find no error in the action of the court in this case *241A regular judgment, after trial before the court, had been entered in March, 1860. At the same term, as it appears, a motion was made by the defendant to set aside the judgment, and for a new trial. This motion was virtually denied at the succeeding term. The act of the court amounted to an amendment of the entry of judgment, and to nothing more. This amendment consists simply in prefixing to it a finding of facts and conclusions of law; the judgment in. all other respects remaining the same. This amendment was, as I apprehend, entirely unnecessary, as the statute does not require such finding to be incorporated into the judgment. But it does not vitiate; it is mere surplusage.
9 Mich. 237
Lorman v. Benson
Decided July 11, 1861
Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1861-07-11
The action^ wa§ trespass. On March 3, 1860, the following order was entered: “This cause having been tried and submitted to the court, and the court having duly considered the same, now here finds the defendant guilty of the trespass alleged in the plaintiff’s declaration, and assesses the plaintiff’s damages at the sum of eight hundred and seventy dollars.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1896
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1861-07-11
View the full empirical analysis of this case →