Estate of Nimick
Estate of Nimick
Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
We find no error in this record. The questions involved appear to have been fully considered and correctly decided by the learned court below. We have no doubt as to that court’s power to make the decree complained of, or as to the propriety of making it. It is unnecessary to show statutory authority for the correction of such a manifest error as appears in this case, patent upon the face of its own records, and thus notice to everybody who has had occasion .to examine them. Every court of justice has inherent power to correct such errors; and it would be strange, indeed, if having had its attention called to such a glaring mistake or blunder of one of its own officers, it would either hesitate or decline to make the necessary correction. But these and all other questions presented by the record have been so thoroughly discussed in the clear, concise and convincing opinion of the learned president of the court below, that nothing need he added to what may be found therein. On that opinion the decree is affirmed and the appeal dismissed at appellant’s costs.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Estate of Wm. K. Nimick. Appeal of John W. Chalfant and James J. Donnell
- Cited By
- 5 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Practice, O. C. — Power of court to correct error in decree. The orphans’ court has discretionary power to correct an error in its decree, or proceedings thereunder, injurious to any of the parties in interest, where it can be done without prejudice to intervening rights. Partnership — Peed—Mistake—Orphans' court. Under proceedings in the orphans’ court the trustee of a deceased partner was directed to convey to the surviving partners real estate the title of which the decedent in his lifetime held in trust for the firm. By mistake the deed was made in form to the surviving partners as tenants in common, and notas surviving partneys. The purpose of the proceedings, as shown by the record, was to vest all of the property in the surviving partners for purposes of liquidation, and the conveyance as made placed (he real estate in peril of being taken for the individual debts of the partners. Held, (1) that the intention of the decree of the court was that the grantees should take the property as partnership, and not as individual property; (2) that the court had power to set aside the deed and direct that a conveyance should be made in proper form.