Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
New York Supreme Court, 1800

Stafford v. Van Zandt

Stafford v. Van Zandt
New York Supreme Court · Decided October 15, 1800
2 Johns. Cas. 66

Counsel

Emott, for the plaintiff., Ten Broedc, for the defendant.

Stafford v. Van Zandt

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The variance between the sum reported by the referees and the amount of the judgment, is a fatal error. *66Without expressing an opinion on the other points, let the judgment for this cause be reversed.

Judgment reversed.(a)

(a) The judgment ought to follow the finding of the referee or of the jury. See Brown v. Chase, 4 Mass. R. 436. Hence in Bent v. Patten, 1 Rand. 25, it was decided that an error in entering up judgment as to the rate of interest, was not merely a clerical error, but one which could only be rectified by an appellate court; see also, Hayton v. Hope, 3 Mis. 53. As to correcting judgments docketed by mistake for less than the true sum; see Hunt v. Grant, 19 Wend. 90.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.