Case ID: njl_3/html/0464-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By the Court. Penstngton, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[659] RIDGWAY against FAIRHOLM.
    OS OEETIOBAEI.
    Docket amended after-certiorari presented.
    The counsel for the plaintiff in certiorari, ipoved the reversal of the judgment below,
    1st. On the ground of the state of demand exceeding the justice’s jurisdiction. But on examining the record, it appeared that the cause had been submitted to referees; and that it did not appear by the record, that any state of . demand had been filed before the justice.
    2d. Because, after the writ of certiorari was served upon the justice, he altered his record, with a view to cure a palpable error, which appeared in it. The alteration complained of, was the entering the choice of a third referee, and his affirmance. A rule having been taken oh the justice, to certify as tó this fact, he [*] returned, that he omitted to enter the choice of a third referee at the time he made, up the record in his docket; that after the certiorari was presented, he believes he discovered the omission, and then made the correction in the margin.
    
      Brown, attorney for plaintiff.
   By the Court.

This was a reasonable fair transaction. If the justice had made an after-entry in this manner, contrary to the truth, it would not only have been error, but the justice would have been liable to severe animadversion for his corrupt conduct.

The counsel for the plaintiff observed, that if this practice was permitted, injustice would be frequently done to plaintiffs in certiorari, who were induced to bring certioraris from .errors apparent on the justice’s docket; which were subjected to be defeated by subsequent entries of the justice, and the plaintiffs thereby saddled with bills of costs.

Penstngton, J.

I have considered that subject; there is nothing in it. The parties know how the truth is; and if a party will bring a certiorari where there is in fact no error in the proceedings of the justice, merely because the justice has omitted to enter the whole of the proceedings in his docket, it is of little consequence how much costs he has to pay. It is his own folly, to say the least of it.

Judgment affirmed.