Fay v. Wenzell
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
At the December term, 1848, of the court of common pleas, this action, which was assumpsit on a promissory note, was tried, and a verdict returned for the plaintiff, and the defendant moved for a new trial, as appears by a written motion filed in the case, because the verdict was against the evidence, and also on account of newly discovered evidence.
Read the full summary
At the December term, 1848, of the court of common pleas, this action, which was assumpsit on a promissory note, was tried, and a verdict returned for the plaintiff, and the defendant moved for a new trial, as appears by a written motion filed in the case, because the verdict was against the evidence, and also on account of newly discovered evidence. No entry of such motion appears on the docket; but at the same term of the court, there is an entry upon it in the following words: “ Verdict set aside and new trial granted.” The action was then continued from term to term, to the December term,…
1Opinion of the CourtDewey, J.
Full effect is given to the clerk’s docket, as a record or statement of the orders of the court, until the record is fully extended. But it is open to amendment by order of the court. So also the extended record may itself be amended, by order of the court whose proceedings are recorded, when found not in accordance with the facts. Errors of this kind may occur, and if they do, the power to amend them according to the truth exists in the court. In the present case the court of common pleas had the power to order this amendment of the record. The amount and kind of evidence requisite to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- President, Directors & Co. of the Bank of Newburgh v. Seymour & SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1817
- Marsh v. BerryNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- Holmes v. RemsonNew York Supreme Court · 1823