Case Name: Anderson v. Kerr
Court: Iowa Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Iowa
Decision Date: 1859-12-24
Citations: 10 Iowa 233
Docket Number: 
Parties: Anderson v. Kerr.
Judges: 
Reporter: Iowa Reports
Volume: 10
Pages: 233–234

Head Matter:
Anderson v. Kerr.
1. Defect in service of notice. A defect in the manner of the service of notice is cured by a demand by the defendant for a copy.
2. Eiiing petition. If a petition is not filed at the time named in the notice it is sufficient if filed ten days before the commencement of the next term.
3. Judgment. Where in an action on a promissory note the petition prayed judgment for the amount of the principal and for interest, it was held that judgment should be rendered only for the principal and . for the interest which accrued after the commencement of the action.
4. Remittitur. An excess in the judgment of the District Court may be remitted in the Supreme Court, and judgment be rendered for the correct amount.
Appeal from Fayette District Court.
Saturday, December 24.
Aotion on two promissory notes. Judgment for the plaintiff and defendant appeals.
McClintock for the appellant.
McGlathery and Ainsworth for the appellee.

Opinion:
Woodward, J.
The first assignment of error is that there was not sufficient service to give jurisdiction over the person. It would certainly be more correct for the sheriff to say he read the notice to the defendant, instead of merely saying that he read it in his presence and hearing. But the defect is remedied when the defendant demanded a copy, which the sheriff, in his return, says he did, and that it was given.
The second assignment is answered by the case of McCaffree v. Guesford, 1 Iowa 80, which holds that, though the petition is not filed at the time named in the notice, it is sufficient if filed ten days before the commencement of the term.
The third assignment is that the judgment is rendered for a greater sum than the plaintiff demands. He asks judgment for the sum of $1292.59 and interest. Judgment was rendered for $1308.10. The petition, in the essential parts, is almost precisely like that in Butcher v. Brand, 6 Iowa 235. Under that decision and Haven Buck v. Baldwin, 5 Iowa 503, the plaintiff is entitled to interest from the commencement of the suit, but not before that. This would have given him as much as the judgment was rendered for. But the plaintiff in this court remits the sum of $6.28, asking an affirmance for $1301.82. This he is entitled to, and judgment will be rendered in this court for the sum of $1301.82 and costs.