Case ID: ala_52/html/0065-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BRICKELL, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Dudley v. Linn.
    
      Action on Bill of Exchange.
    
    
      Error; what not ground of. — It cannot be assigned for error that a judgment rendered on, and corresponding with, the verdict, is for a greater amount than claimed in the complaint. The remedy in such a case is by motion for new trial in the court below.
    Appeal from City Court of Montgomery.
    Tried before Hon. John D. Cunningham.
    The point decided appears sufficiently from the opinion.
    Bbagg & Thobington, for appellant.
    Stone & Clopton, contra.
    
   BRICKELL, C. J.

The assignments of error in this cause cannot be sustained. Judgment was rendered on verdict, and corresponds with it. It has long been settled that when a judgment is rendered on, and corresponds with, a verdict, it cannot be assigned as error that tbe judgment exceeds tbe amount claimed in the complaint or declaration. The remedy is by a motion in the court below for a new trial. 1 Brick. Dig. 776, § 39; Drake v. Johnston & Seats, January term, 1873. The judgment is affirmed.