Martin v. Barnhardt

Citations

• 39 Ill. 9

Syllabus

<p>1. Entries oe record—of the impaneling of a jury—presumption where no exception is talcen. Where it appears from the record of a cause, that there was a jury on the trial below, and that they were duly sworn, in the absence of any exception to the mode in which they were tried, selected and sworn, it will be presumed that it was done according to law.</p> <p>2. Presumption in favor of the regularity of proceedings. Nothing appearing to the contrary, it will be presumed that courts of general jurisdiction perform their duty and try causes according to the due course of law.</p> <p>3. Judgment—its requisites—presumption in regard to its sufficiency. Upon a verdict for the plaintiff in an action on the- case, for three thousand dollars damages, this entry was made: “ Judgment entered upon the verdict for $3000, and costs.” Held, not to be a sufficient entry of a judgment.</p> <p>4. It cannot be presumed that a judgment has been regularly entered merely because a suit has been instituted, or because a jury has found a verdict in the case,- or because the clerk may make such a recital as the above.</p> <p>5. Remanding a cause—whether a new trial must be had. In a case where no error had intervened prior to the verdict in the cause, which was sufficient to sustain a judgment but no sufficient judgment was entered, the judgment was reversed and the cause remanded with leave to the party to move in the court below for a judgment on the verdict, it being deemed unnecessary to award a venire facias de novo.</p>