O'Flynn v. Eagle
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne Circuit, where judgment was rendered in favor of defendants in error, against O’Flynn, as endorser, and Daniel Finn, the other plaintiff in error, as maker of a promissory note. The error assigned was, that there was no service of process upon Finn. After error assigned, the court below, on motion of defendants in error, amended the record so as to show judgment against O’Flynn only.
1Opinion of the Court
Campbell J.:
The rxxle adopted in O'Flynn v. Holmes, 7 Mich. 454, was, we think, correct, and we are disposed to adhere to it. It is true, the amendment made in the court below, iix that case, was not made from the record, but from matter aliunde, xvhile here it is based entirely upon the files and records; bxxt we think there is no difference in principle, so far as our action is concerned. If we recognize the amendments as binding at all on us, when made xvithoxxt a remittitur, we can not distinguish in favor of either kind; becaxxse when we once sanction them on our own records, we can not…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Matheson's Admin. v. Grant's Admin.Supreme Court of the United States · 1844
- Jones v. PattenIndiana Supreme Court · 1851
- Moore v. TracyNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Emery v. WhitwellMichigan Supreme Court · 1859
- Cheetham v. TillotsonCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1808
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ballance v. DunningtonMichigan Supreme Court · 1928