Case Name: Lambert and Another v. Blackman
Court: Supreme Court of Indiana
Jurisdiction: Indiana
Decision Date: 1820-07-19
Citations: 1 Blackf. 59
Docket Number: 
Parties: Lambert and Another v. Blackman.
Judges: 
Reporter: Blackford
Volume: 1
Pages: 59–60

Head Matter:
Lambert and Another v. Blackman.
Where a promissory note in the French language, is declared on as if it were in English, the variance is immaterial.
If the jury give greater damages than are declared for, and the plaintiff sign judgment for the greater sum, the Court may permit him to amend during the term, by entering a remittitur for the excess.
ERROR to the Vigo Circuit Court. — Assumpsit on a promissory note. Plea, the general issue. The note was in the French language, but was declared on as if it had been in English. The variance, at the trial, was held immaterial. The damages were laid in the declaration at 300 dollars. The jury gave a verdict for 322 dollars and 28 cents in damages; for which sum, together with costs, judgment was entered during the terra. Afterwards, in the same term, the plaintiff below, by leave of the Circuit Court, entered a remittitur of 22 dollars and 28 cents, the extra sum.

Opinion:
Holman, J.
One error assigned is, that the note, being in the French language, should have been set forth in that language, in the declaration. We are of opinion, that the nature and extent of the obligation created by the note, were all that were requisite in pleading, and these are sufficiently set forth in the. English language . The entry of the remittitur after judgment, is also assigned for error. A remittitur is most regular ly entered before judgment, but it may be entered at any time after judgment, while the proceedings of the term are yet before the Court. And even after a writ of error is sued out, a remittitur may be entered on paying the costs of the writ of error. 1 Sell. Pr. 481. — 2 Sell. Pr. 408 .
Tails and Blake, for the plaintiffs.
Dewey, for the defendant.
Per Curiam.
The judgment is affirmed, with 5 per cent. damages, and costs.
The instrument itself must be stated in terms, or according to the legal effect. If it be in a foreign language, it may nevertheless be stated as if it were in English, without noticing the foreign language. Attorney General v. Valabreque, Wightw. 9. — Chitt. on Bills, Am. Ed. 1821, p. 456. Aliter, in case of a libel written in a foreign language; there the plaintiff must set forth the original words, with a translation of them showing their application to him. Zenobio v. Axtell 6 T. R. 162. — Per Ellenborough, C. J., in Cook v. Cox, 3 Maule and Selw. 115.
Even in a term subsequent to that in which the judgment was signed. 2 Arch. Pr. 221. — Usher v. Dansey, 4 Maule and Selw. 94.