Marine Bank Co. v. Mallers

Appellate Court of Illinois

Marine Bank Co. v. Mallers

58 Ill. App. 232, 1895 Ill. App. LEXIS 2

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedApril 4, 1895

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 58 Ill. App. 232 (Marine Bank Co. v. Mallers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Marine Bank Co. v. Mallers, 58 Ill. App. 232, 1895 Ill. App. LEXIS 2 (Ill. Ct. App. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Waterman

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The record here filed contains no assignment of errors, and we might for this reason dismiss the appeal.

We have, however, considered the brief filed by appellant, and find no sufficient reason for reversing the judgment of the court below. The power of the court to amend its record during the term can not be questioned.

Nunc pro tune orders are usually made because something ordered should have been earlier done.

It clearly appeared to the court that the dismissal made November 9th, should have been at the costs of the plaintiff; such being the case, the court hot only had the power during the term to correct the order it had made, but in its discretion to make the order of November 26th, nunc pro tunc as of the 9th. Ives v. Hulse, 17 Ill. App. 30; Horner v. Horner, 37 Ill. App. 199.

What the effect of a nunc pro tune order will be upon the rights of third parties, is a question upon which the court in making the order does not pass, as it has not passed upon what the effect of this order will be upon collateral interest of the parties to this litigation. Black on Judgments, Secs. 136 and 137. The appeal is dismissed.

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