Glasgow v. Kann

Citations

• 171 Pa. 262
• 32 A. 1095
• 1895 Pa. LEXIS 1300

Syllabus

<p>Judgment—Indexing judgments—Priority of lien—Act of March 29, 1827 —Mistake—Practice, O. P.-</p> <p>Under the act of March 29, 1827, 9 Sm. L. 219, providing that entries in the judgment docket “ shall be so made that one shall follow the other in the order of time in which the said judgments shall have been rendered, entered or filed,” the order of actual entry, not the mere date on which it appears, determines the legal priority. Where a judgment posterior in position on the docket to another judgment bears an anterior date, and the docket entry of the judgment posterior in position contains the memorandum, “ see indorsement on note ” and on the note these words M'e indorsed, “Filed 6th of January, 1893 .... 11 Jan. ’93 indexed on record but within note having been returned in error with statement to Plff.,” the inconsistency in the record is explained by the reference.</p> <p>A judgment regularly entered in the judgment docket cannot be deprived of its position then acquired by any act of the prothonotary in putting an earlier date to an entry made afterwards lower down on the page.</p> <p>The proper practice when errors, clerical or other, are discovered is not to deface the record with erasures or blots or interlineations, but to put on it an explanation showing the error, how it was made, and how and when and by whom corrected. Mitchell, J.</p>