Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

MORRISON, Administrator of RAMEREZ, Deceased, Appellant, v. DAPMAN&WEST, Respondents

         JUDGES: Heydenfeldt, Justice, delivered the opinion of the Court.

         OPINION

          HEYDENFELDT, Judge

         In July, 1852, the Superior Court entered judgment that the defendants recover their costs, to be levied de bonis intestatis.

         In January, 1853, this judgment is opened and amended, so that the costs be levied de bonis propriis.

         A court may at any time render or amend a judgment nunc pro tunc. But this power is confined to cases where the record discloses that the entry on the minutes does not correctly give what was the judgment of the Court.

         If there is no record evidence to show that the judgment was different from the one entered, the latter must stand as the judgment until reversed.

         And although a court may thus at any time make the entry conform to what was the judgment rendered, it will not be permitted, after the lapse of a term, to open upon motion and render a new judgment. Such a practice is too loose, and would give rise to too much uncertainty.

         Judgment reversed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Morrison v. Dapman & West
(Oct 1, 1853)