Case Name: The New Albany and Salem Railroad Company v. Chamberlain
Court: Supreme Court of Indiana
Jurisdiction: Indiana
Decision Date: 1856-12-05
Citations: 8 Ind. 278
Docket Number: 
Parties: The New Albany and Salem Railroad Company v. Chamberlain.
Judges: 
Reporter: Indiana Reports
Volume: 8
Pages: 278–280

Head Matter:
The New Albany and Salem Railroad Company v. Chamberlain.
APPEAL from the White Circuit Court.
Chamberlain filed a complaint before a justice of the peace, against James Brooks, president of the New Albany and Salem Bailroad Companyfor the killing of a i j j. An j n eow valued at 40 dollars. .
The summons was served on the conductor of a railroad train on said railroad by copy, and on the return day of the summons a judgment was rendered against James Brooks, president, &c., ior the amount claimed, by default, from which he appealed to the Circuit Court. On the calling of the'case.'in ike Circuit Court, Brooks moved to dismiss the suit for want of sufficient notice and service of process, but the plaintiff interposed a motion for leave to amend his complaint, which was granted, and the complaint changed so as to make the appellant the defendant instead of Brooks.
The constable was also permitted to amend his return of service upon the summons, so as to show that it was served upon a conductor of a train of cars on the appellant’s railroad; and the Court then ordered the case to stand docketed, and proceed against the appellant instead of against BrooJcs. To all these rulings and orders of. the Court, the appellant excepted. The case was submitted to the Court, and the value of the cow found to be 40 dollars, whereupon a judgment was rendered for the sum of 80 dollars, twice her value, and a docket fee of 5 dollars against the appellant.

Opinion:
Ber Curiam.
As to the amendment in this case, see Laiman v. The New Albany and Salem Railroad Company at this term .
The Court below erred in giving double damages. Madison and Indianapolis Railroad Company v. Whiteneck, at this term .
A remittitur cannot be allowed in this case of simply the double damages; because in the Circuit Court the defendant may have reduced the judgment 19 per cent, below that rendered by the justice, which would leave the stop. for which judgment should have been given. ¥e do not know what that reduction was, and hence, there is no certain amount which we can fix as the sum to be remitted.
H. W. Chase and J. A. Wilstach, for the appellant.
S. A. Huff, Z. Baird and J. M. Larue, for the appellee.
The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
Ante, 212.
Ante, 217.