Cannon v. Tompkins
Cannon v. Tompkins
Opinion of the Court
This record shows that the defendant in error instituted his suit against the plaintiff in error, upon a promissory note, payable to one Elias Tompkins, of whose estate the plaintiff below represented himself to be the administrator.
The record shows that judgment was rendered in the court below, against Cannon, upon confession, on the 21st day of October, 1856, and that at the spring term, 1858, Cannon moved the court to reform the judgment, so that it might not appear to be upon confession. The judgment was reformed accordingly, and recited that the answer of defendant, Cannon, had been stricken out by the court, upon motion, and judgment rendered by default, for want of an answer. The record contains no motion of the plaintiff below to strike out the defendant’s answer, no exception to the answer, and no order of the court upon any such motion or exception. The record does not contain any bill of exceptions or statement of facts. The plaintiff in error complains that his answer was improperly stricken out, that the plaintiff below was a foreign administrator, &c., &c. In the absence of a bill of exceptions, we cannot know whether
We see nothing in the record which authorizes us to disturb that judgment, and the same is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Minor M. Cannon v. George W. Tompkins
- Status
- Published