Case ID: cole-cai-cas_1/html/0060-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Pepoon and another ads. Jenkins.
    
    RIGGS, for the defendants, moved to quash the writ for want of the clerk’s name to it, and Woods-, at the same time, moved for leave to amend. He contended that the writ is supposed to be the act of the clerk, and ought not to prejudice the party ; and cited 1 Cromp. 106. and 1 Durn. and East, 783. Yelv. 64.
   Per Curiam.

It may be considered as the omission of the clerk, and amendable. Let it be amended, on payment of costs.