Case ID: minor_1/html/0185-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Judge Saffold\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Tankersley against Silburn.
    
      June, 1824.
    1, Omission of re* cital of nature of action in the declaration cured by verdict.
    2, The use of the ’ past, instead of the present tense, $-for dollars, and figures instead of words In the entry of a judgment is not Error.
    S, Verdict in as-sumpsit for $90, with interest from a day stated, and judgment for $90, with inte-restfrom thesame day, reversed ana rendered for aggregate amount.
    W RIT of Error to Mobile Circuit Court—declaration •begins as follows : “ James D. Siiburn complains of Rich- “ ard Tankersley in custody, and for that whereas the said Richard on,” &c.—and sets out an indebitatus assumpsit for three hundred dollars for so much money paid by plaintiff to defendant by mistake in settlement of accounts ; in which settlement defendant charged plaintiff said $300 for rent of a house, to which rent the defendant was not entitled, setting out a super se assumpsit in the usual form. Plea— non assumpsit and issue. The entry of the verdict and judgment, after setting out the names of the Jurors, proceeds as follows : “ the Jury find a verdict for the plaintiff “ for the full amount of claim, say $90, with lawful interest “ from the payment of the money, 20th January, 1818.; " whereupon it was considered by the Court that judgment if be entered up against the defendant for the full amount of “ the plaintiff’s claim, say $90, with lawful interest from the payment of the money, 20th January, 1820.”
    
      
      Tankersley here assigns as Error — 1st, The nature of the action does not appear from the declaration. 2d, The defendant is described as in custody without saying of what plea, whether trespass, case, or debt. 3d, The verdict and judgment are uncertain, and refer to a claim and date not to be found in the Record. 4th, They are not for a specific sum in damages, and the amount is expressed in figures. 5th, The judgment is in the past instead of the present tense.
   Judge Saffold

delivered the opinion of the Court.

In this case the declaration states an indebitatus assump-sit in the usual form, with the circumstances of the mistake and a super se assumpsit, but omits the usual words describing the species of action ; an omission available only by special demurrer if at all. The defect, if it be one, was cured by the verdict. As to the entries of verdict and judgment it would have been most proper that the amount should have been expressed in words, which were less liable to alteiation than figures. But the Records are in the cafe of a sworn officer. It is not to be presumed that he would abuse his trust; and any alteration of the Record would subject the offender to the severe animadversion of the law. Even if we were of opinion that policy requires words instead of figures to be used in judicial proceedings, it has not been required by the law or the general custom of this country. The mark used to denote dollars has obtained general currency; and it is believed that throughout the United States this sign is as well understood, and conveys the idea of dollars as distinctly as the word itself.

The use of the past instead of the present tense is a clerical and grammatical error, but it cannot vary the effect of the judgment' or affect the merits of the case ; but the amount of the judgment is uncertain. The date from which interest is to be calculated is given by the verdict, but the time till which it was to run cannot be ascertained without reference to the entire Record: it would run till the rendition of the judgment, from which time the principal and interest as a gross amount of damages would carry interest. The rendition of judgment is the act of the Court, and a defect in the judgment cannot be amended by the Clerk in issuing execution. The verdict, with the other parts of the Record, afforded data from which the Circuit Court might have rendered judgment for the proper amount. The judgment for its uncertainty must be reversed, and judgment for the proper amount rendered here.

Judgment was accordingly rendered here against Silbum for the costs accruing in this Court, and against Tankershy foi one hundred and six dollars and twenty cents, with interest thereon from the 15th day of April, 1820, the date of the judgment of the Circuit Court, and for the costs accruing m the Circuit Court.

Acre, for plaintiff.

Rust, for defendant in Error.