Court Opinion

ID: 6537455
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-19 22:12:54.580621+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:55:42.323811
License: Public Domain

By the Court, Dickinson, J. We find none of the objections taken in the Court below tenable. We do not deem it necessary to determine the point, whether the process was sued out in strict conformity with the statute, or not; nor whether the notice was properly served. If there be any defects on these points, which we think questionable, there can be no doubt but that they are fully cured by the parties appearing in the first instance, and, by their consent, agreeing to a continuance. The object of service and notice was, to apprise the party of the nature of the pro-ccedings against him. The fact of his agreeing to the continuance, is evidence of his having made himself a party to the record; and by such appearance, any defect that might exist, as to the service of the writ or notice, was waived. The judgment was entered by default against Rogers, the plaintiff having first continued as to Ford. This judgment is manifestly irregular, but its informality is cured by our statute of amendments. The proper judgment should have been by wihdicAt. Judgment affirmed.