Rothgerber v. Wonderly

Citations

• 66 Ill. 390

Syllabus

<p>1. Judgment—construction as to amount. Where the plaintiff obtained a verdict for $1250, and entered a remittitur of $600, but the clerk entered up a judgment in favor of the plaintiff for $1250, “ less §600 to be remitted:” Held, that the entry was a valid judgment for $1250, notwithstanding the words “less $600 to be remitted,” upon which an execution could have been issued.</p> <p>2. Appeal bond—what is to he taken as a reversal. Where a remittitur of §6po was entered on a verdict for $1250, but the clerk rendered judgment in the usual manner for the latter sum “ less $600 to be remitted;” and on appeal to this court, such judgment was reversed and remanded, with a mandate to enter judgment for $650: Heldx that this was a prosecution of the appeal with effect, and that the surety on the appeal bond was not liable.</p> <p>3. Same—construction of condition. The condition in an appeal bond on appeal to the Supreme Court that the appellant should pay the amount of the judgment “ rendered and to he rendered ” against him in case of affirmance, held, to mean the payment of the judgment theretofore rendered in the court below, and such judgment as shall be rendered by the Supreme Court in case of affirmance, and not the judgment that may thereafter be rendered in the lower court under the special mandate of this court, or on a trial de novo.</p> <p>4. Variance. In a suit on an appeal bond, where the declaration alleged the judgment appealed from to have been $650, when in fact it was $1250, the variance is fatal.</p>