France v. Ruddiman
France v. Ruddiman
Opinion of the Court
The writ of error in this case was taken to the judgment on the scire facias on the mortgage. The depositions taken under the rule to show cause why that judgment should not be opened, are no part of the record in the proceeding by scire facias. We cannot consider them, because they are not before us by bill of exception or in any other manner. If Mrs. Giasby were living and did not choose to plead her former coverture in defence against the mortgage, judgment would be entered against her on the scire facias, notwithstanding the fact of such coverture. She had ample opportunity to exercise this personal privilege at any time between 1878, the date of the mortgage, and 1884, the time of her death, but did not choose to do so. We see no reason for departing from our numerous well considered decisions to the effect that a judgment cannot be stricken off for irregularity unless it appear upon the record,
Judgment affirmed. ■
Reference
- Full Case Name
- CHARLES FRANCE v. H. A. RUDDIMAN [David v. Glasby]
- Cited By
- 8 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. A judgment cannot be stricken off for irregularity unless such irregularity appear upon the record; and depositions taken in the court below upon a rule to open a judgment, do not form a part of the record, and cannot be considered in the Supreme Court. 2. Especially is this the case, where judgment has been entered on two returns of nihil to writs of scire facias sur mortgage, and thereafter a third party, a stranger to the mortgage, seeks, on a rule to open that judgment, to set up the alleged coverture of the mortgagor, then deceased, which defence the said mortgagor had never asserted, though she had ample opportunity so to do.'