Case ID: pin_3/html/0121-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Larrabee, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Strong vs. Catlin.
    1. Summons— Seal.— A summons issued and served without being sealed is not void, but is amendable and the defect is cured by verdict.
    2. Pbactice — Interlooutoby Judgment. — It is error in case of default in an action of assumpsit to assess damages and enter final judgment without interlocutory judgmenthaving been first- entered.
    (3 Chand., 130.)
    
      EEEOE to the Circuit Court for Dane County.
    Action of assumpsit 'brought by Albert Catlin against Moses M. Strong.
    
    The summons by which the action was commenced was not sealed with the seal of the court. It was served personally on the defendant. He did not appear, and being in default, the court in term time, without interlocutory judgment having been entered, ordered the clerk to assess the plaintiff’s damages, and he reported that he had assessed them at $293.95, and upon his report judgment was given for the plaintiff and against the defendant for that sum and costs, and the defendant brought this writ of error.
    
      M. M. Strong in pro. per.
    
    contended that the summons was void for want of a seal, and that damages could not be assessed without interlocutory judgment being first entered, citing Graham’s Prac., 121 and 123 ; 1 Wend., 16 ; 4 Cow., 550; 5 id., 15 ; 4 id., 504; 15 Wend., 617; 4 Cow., 548; 1 id., 38; 4 Johns., 309 ; 1 Cow., 41; 8 id., 27 ; 12 Johns., 178; 3 id., 257.
    Gatlin, Abbott £ Clark, for defendant in errror,
    cited Graham’s Prac., 121; 4 Cow., 250; 1 Wend., 16; claiming that a writ without seal is only voidable and not void.
   Larrabee, J.

The summons by which this action was commenced had no seal; but this was clearly one of those defects provided for in the statute of amendments, and was cured by verdict.

Where the defendant suffers a default to be entered against him in an action of assumpsit, the judgment in the first instance is only interlocutory; and this must be entered before the plaintiff can proceed to have his damages assessed, or to complete his final judgment in the case.

No interlocutory judgment was entered, but a final one, of which complaint is now made. This must be reversed, and the plaintiff can proceed to enter his interlocutory judgment at the next term of the circuit court.

Judgment reversed.