Thorp v. Platt

34 Iowa 314
CourtSupreme Court of Iowa
DecidedJuly 13, 1872
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 34 Iowa 314 (Thorp v. Platt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Thorp v. Platt, 34 Iowa 314 (iowa 1872).

Opinion

Day, J.

I. The omission of the seal did not invalidate the statement, as between the immediate parties. In New York it has been held that judgment by a confession in a justice’s court, upon a statement to which no affidavit is affixed as required by law, is valid and binding upon the defendant notwithstanding such omission. Stone v. Williams, 40 Barb. 322.

The court might, therefore, have approved the judgment without amendment. But it was competent for the court to grant leave to amend the statement by attaching the seal. Mitchell v. Van Buren et al., 27 N. Y. 300; Union Bank v. Bush, 36 id. 631; Ingram et al. v. Robbins, 33 id. 409. These decisions were made under a statute in all essential respects like our own.

II. The motion to set aside the judgment upon the ground of insufficiency in the statement was properly overruled. As between the parties, the statement is clearly sufficient, and none other has complained. Plummer & Douglass, v. Watson, 14 Iowa, 69; Vannice v. Green, Traer & Co., 16 id. 574; Miller & Luther v. Earle, 24 N. Y. 110.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Bradley v. Delaware County
10 N.W. 898 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1881)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
34 Iowa 314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thorp-v-platt-iowa-1872.