Gordon v. Higley
Supreme Court of Iowa
This was an action brought up from a Justice’s Court by Appeal. According to the usual mode of doing business in the Justice’s Courts, in some of the counties in this Territory, there .are no pleadings: and the nature of the action is only determined by the subject matter.
Read the full summary
This was an action brought up from a Justice’s Court by Appeal. According to the usual mode of doing business in the Justice’s Courts, in some of the counties in this Territory, there .are no pleadings: and the nature of the action is only determined by the subject matter. The case comes into this Court, from the District Court, by a Writ of Error, and the error relied on is, that the Court below directed an alteration in the verdict after the separation of the jury. cited 2 Wheat. 225 Patterson vs. U. States. — Grimes for the Defendant. The verdict of the Jury can be amended from the Judge’s…
1Opinion of the Court
BY THE COURT.
The only question presented, in this case, is, whether the Court below was right in directing the alteration of the verdict. It is contended by the Counsel for the Plaintiff in Error, first, that the Record does not show the nature of the original action — so that the District Court had no legitimate guide in assimilating the verdict to any of the approved technical forms, and, in the next place, that though the District Court has authority to correct mere clerical errors in entering the.verdict of the Jury, it has none to change that verdict itself, even in matter of form.
In the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Beekman v. BemusNew York Supreme Court · 1827
3Cited by1 opinion
- Burnham v. BurnhamAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900