Definitions from Black's Law Dictionary: 2nd Edition and Ballentine's Law Dictionary as are available for each term in each dictionary.
  • Ballentine's Law Dictionary

    A mistake of law or fact; a mistake of the court in the trial of a cause; a writ to review an inferior court’s judgment in a higher court for errors on the face of the record.

  • Black's Law Dictionary: 2nd Edition

    A mistaken judgment or incorrect belief as to the existence or effect of matters of fact or a false or mistaken conception or application of the law. Such a mistaken or false conception or application of the law to the facts of a cause as will furnish ground for a review of the proceedings upon a writ of error; a mistake of law, or false or irregular application of it, such as vitiates the proccedings and warrants the reversal of the judgment Error is also used as an elliptical expression for "writ of error;" as in saying that error lies; that a judgment may be reversed on error.
    —Assignment of errors. In practice. The statement of the plaintiff's case on a writ of error, setting forth the errors complained of; corresponding with the declaration in an ordinary action. 2 Tidd, Pr. 1168; 3 Steph. Comm. 644. Wells v. Martin, 1 Ohio St. 388; Lamy v. Lamy, 4 N. M. (Johns.) 43, 12 Pac. 650. A specification of the errors upon which the appellant will rely, with such fullness as to give aid to the court in the examination of the transcript. Squires v. Foorman, 10 Cal. 298.
    — Clerical error. See Clerical.
    —Common error. (Lat. communis error, g. v.) An error for which there are many precedents. "Common error goeth for a law." Finch, Law, b. 1, c. 3, no. 54.
    —Error coram nobis. Error committed in the proceedings "before us;" i. e., error assigned as a ground for reviewing, modifying, or vacating a judgment in the same court in which it was rendered.
    —Error coram vobis. Error in the proceedings "before you;" words used in a writ of error directed by a court of review to the court which tried the cause.
    — Error in fact. In judicial proceedings, error in fact occurs when, by reason of some fact which is unknown to the court and not apparent on the record (e. g., the coverture, infancy, oh death of one of the parlies), it renders a judgment which is void or voidable. Cruger v. McCracken, 87 Tex. 584, 30 S. W. 537; Kihl-holz v. Wolff, 8 111. App. 371; Kasson v. Mills, 8 How. Prae. (N. Y.) 379; Tanner v Marsh, 53 Barb. (N. Y.) 440.
    —Error in law. An error of the court in applying the law to the case on trial, e. g., in ruling on the admission of evidence, or in charging the jury. McKenzie v. Bismarck Water Co., 6 N. D. 361, 71 N. W. 608; Scherrer v. Hale, 9 Mont. 63, 22 Pac. 15i; Campbell v. Patterson, 7 Vt. 89.
    —Error nominis. Error of name. A mistake of detail in the name of a person; used in contradistinction to error de persons, a mistake as to identity.
    —Error of law. He is under an error of law who is truly informed of the existence of facts, but who draws from them erroneous conclusions of law. Civ. Code La. art. 1822. Mowatt v. Wright, 1 Wend. (N. Y.) 360, 19 Am. Dec. 508.
    —Error of fact. That is called "error of fact" which proceeds either from ignorance of that which really exisis or from a mistaken belief in the existence of that which has none. Civ. Code La. art. 1821. See Norton v. Maiden, 15 Me. 45, 32 Am. Dec. 132; Mowatt v. Wright, 1 Wend. (N. Y.) 36o, 19 Am. Dec. 508.
    —Fundamental error. In appellate practice. Error which goes to the merits of the plaintiff's cause of action, and which will be considered on review, whether assigned as error or not, where the justice of the case seems to require it. Hollywood v. Wellhausen, 28 Tex. Civ. App. 541, 68 S. W. 329.
    —Harmless error. In appellate practice. An error committed in the progress of the trial below, but which was not prejudicial to the rights of the party assigning it, and for which, therefore, the court will not reverse the judgment, as, where the error was neutralized or corrected by subsequent proceedings in the case, or where, notwithstanding the error, the particular issue was found in that party's favor, or where, even if the error had not been committed, he could not have been legally entitled to prevail.
    —Invited error. In appellate practice. The principle of "invited error" is that if, during the progress of a cause, a party requests or moves the court to make a ruling which is actually erroneous, and the court does so, that party cannot take advantage of the error on appeal or review. Gresham v. Harcourt, 93 Tex. 149, 53 S. W. 1019.
    —Reversible error. In appellate practice. Such an error as warrants the appellate court in reversing the judgment before it New Mexican R. Co. v. Hendricks, 6 N. M. 611, 30 Pac. 901.-
    —Technical error. In appellate practice. A merely abstract or theoretical error, which is practically not injurious to the party assigning it. Epps v. State, 102 Ind. 539, 1 N. E. 491.
    —Errors excepted. A phrase appended to an account stated, in order to excuse slight mistakes or oversights.
    — Error, writ of. See Writ of Error.