Forwood v. Quayle Lodge

The exception cannot be allowed, and it is needless to hear proof of the fact as stated. It touches a matter subsequent to the judgment, and not appearing on the record. It suggests as error the refusal of the justice to proceed to a second trial, which itself would have been error. The plaintiff was not entitled to a new trial, and the justice had no right to grant it. If by erroneously asking a new trial, he has suffered the time for appealing to elapse, it is his owm folly, but cannot vitiate a judgment already correctly rendered. His ignorance of the law or of his own rights cannot impair the rights of the defendant.

Judgment affirmed.