118 Kan. 439 | Kan. | 1925
The opinion of the court was delivered by
This was an action on an account, and to secure its collection the plaintiff attached certain chattels of its debtor, the Midwest and Gulf Oil Corporation. At the commencement of the action the defendant was not correctly named, being designated as the Midwest and Gulf Oil Company. About a month later, with leave of court, the plaintiff corrected the title of the action and made an appropriate amendment to its petition.
Defendant filed an answer and cross petition alleging damages which it suffered because of the attachment during the month intervening between the time when its property was attached and the time when the pleadings were corrected.
From the ruling of the trial'court sustaining plaintiff’s objection to defendant’s evidence in support of its cross petition, the defendant appeals.
Under our practice, it was perfectly proper to treat the error in the name of defendant as one of mere form, and this is especially true where, as in this case, there was no doubt as to the identity of the defendant. This defendant was plaintiff’s debtor and it was this defendant’s property which was attached to satisfy the debt it owed to plaintiff. (See Butter Tub Co. v. National Bank, 115 Kan. 63, 222 Pac. 754.)
The evidence which defendant might possibly have produced in support of its claim for damages was never forthcoming, by deposi
Affirmed.