Lutkins v. Den ex dem. Zabriskie
Lutkins v. Den ex dem. Zabriskie
Opinion of the Court
■ We have always been very liberal in regard to
The objection is not merely technical: it is one which involves substantial rights, and the paper must be disregarded.
Mr. Vroom then moved to reverse for error alleged to be apparent upon the face of the record. lie said that it did not appear that the judgment had been signed by the judge, which is an essential part of the judgment. Rev. Slat. 940 § 77 — 8.
If no record unless signed, then no record here ; but sent up and treated as a judgment, it should be reversed as defective.
The statute is merely directory to the clerk, as to the manner in which the proceedings are to be 'recorded. It might as well be assigned for error, that the proceedings were not recorded in well bound books on good paper when so directed. The proceedings in this case are in fact recorded in such book, and signed as directed by the statute, neither of which matters appear by the return — nor need they appear.
Besides, this is not specially assigned for error. It cannot bo brought under the general assignment. If specially assigned, the defendant in error might have had the return amended.
Per curiam. There is no ground for reversal in the reason urged. The statute requires the record of judgments in civil cases to be signed for the purpose of verification. It must be signed, or it cannot be used in evidence; but mere matter of
Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- LUTKINS v. DEN EX DEM. ZABRISKIE
- Status
- Published