Harris v. Osenback

13 Ind. 445
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 15, 1859
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 13 Ind. 445 (Harris v. Osenback) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Harris v. Osenback, 13 Ind. 445 (Ind. 1859).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Suit upon a note. Judgment for plaintiff, by default, for 148 dollars, 25 cents.

The errors assigned are, that the judgment is for 21 dollars, 78 cents too much; and that the complaint does not appear to have been subscribed by either the plaintiff or his attorney, as required by the statute. 2 R. S. p. 43.

The plaintiff offers, in this Court, to remit the excess for which judgment was taken. The failure to subscribe the complaint is such a merely formal or clerical error as the plaintiff should have been permitted to amend, when pointed out in the Court below, and will be considered as amended here.

If the plaintiff should remit the excess, the judgment is affirmed at the cost of the appellee, incurred in this Court; if the excess is not remitted, the judgment is reversed, &c._

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Canadian Bank of Commerce v. Leale
111 P. 759 (California Court of Appeal, 1910)
Plew v. Jones
74 N.E. 618 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1905)
Sims v. Dame
15 N.E. 217 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1888)
Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. Peck
99 Ind. 68 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1884)
Widup v. Gibson
53 Ind. 484 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1876)
Lowry v. Dutton
28 Ind. 473 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1867)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
13 Ind. 445, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-osenback-ind-1859.