1 Shan. Cas. 113 | Tenn. | 1858
delivered tbe opinion of tbe Court:
We are of opinion tbat tbe Circuit Judge did not err in this case, because we tbink tbe writ issued to Dickson County, against Theodore Baxter, must be regarded as a counterpart of that issued to Robertson, against Robert Baxter and James T. Connel, and being of opinion, as we are, from tbe statement in tbe petition, tbat tbe plaintiff in error was in fact served with process, it was gross neglect in him, not to have appeared at tbe proper time, and make defence to tbe suit. ‘
But if this were not so, and be in fact were not served, tbe sheriff having made return, tbat be was, it has become a record, and cannot be averred against, and if false, tbe remedy of tbe plaintiff in error is by action on tbe case, for a false return, or by bill in equity to enjoin tbe judgment. McBee vs. The State, Meigs. Rep. 122 ; Ridgwayvs. The Bank of Tenn.
This necessarily reverses the judgment upon {he dismissal of the petition.
Judgment reversed.
.) McCully v. Malcolm, 9 Humph. 187, 193: Love v. Smith, 4 Yerg. 117, 126.
In. the proceeding under the writ of error Coram Nolis, nothing can he assigned as error which contradicts the ord of the original suit. Crawford v. Williams, 1 Swan, 341, 346. See further, as to the writ of error Coram Nobis, Tibbs v. Anderson. Infra.
.) Harlan v. Dew, 3 Head, 505; Tumley v. Clarks v. & Memphis R. R. Co., 2 Cold. 327.