OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS. 169 LITTLE ROM( July, OM. CHARLES L. JEFFiens against CHARLES MORGAN, fcir use; $.c. JEFFRIES ERROR to Pulaski Circuit Court. tos.
MORGAN. If a judgment by confession is'formally and properly entered up, the party confessing is estopped by his own voluntary act from questioning its correctneSs. In such case, if there be error in the computation of interest, it is too late in, the Supreme Court to take advantage of it. This was an actiOn of debt on a jndgment recovered against the plaintiff in error in , the State Of Alabama. The record stateS that the plaintiff in error,confessed judgment in the court below for $429 40 cletA, and $166 daMages, to reverse ,which judgment for an error, as he contended, in the coMputation. of interest, he brought his' writ of error. HALL, for the plaintiff in error: The only question for the consider.. ation of the court is as to the amount of interest to be allowed on the judgment in Alabama. The defendant contends that the judgment helow is for a greater Sum ,than purports to be due-on the record, or in the confession: See Digest, title "Interest." SCOTT, contra: kjudgreent by confession is a release of all errors. Dige s. t, p. 3a2, sec. 52. The damages-given by the court below were for interest, and were calculated under the laws of Alabama, at eight pee cent, the legal interest of that state. See Laws cf Alabama. The prineiple is well settled that interest is to be paid on contracts according to the law of the 4c place" where they. are to be performed. Story's Confict.of Laiss,,241. This action was instituted on .a judgment rendered in the State of Ala-bama. The debt was to be paid in Alabama, conseqUefitly the interest due on said judgment was to be calculated under the laws Of Ala-bama. It is a universal rule of the common law, that the "leer loci contractus" will in all cases give the rule of interest. 'If the place of performance is different from that of the contract, : the interest will be according to that of the former. See Story's Conflict of Laws, 246-7; and the otber , authorities there cited; Johnson's Digest, p. 284. LACY, Judge, delivered the opinion of the Court: This is an action of debt, founded on a judgment recovered by the plaintiff below, against the defendant, , in the State of Alabama.
170 CASES IN THE SUPREME COURT LITTLE ROCK, The record shows that the present plaintilf in error came into open July , 1838. court, and in proper person confessed judgment " for the sum of four JEFFR IE S hundred and twenty-nine dollars and forty cents, the debt in the dec-NOR t. G .. AN.. laration mentioned, and also the sum of one hundred and sixty-six dol-. !ars in damages." The Circuit Coort gave judgment for the two sums acknowledged to be due. To reverse the judgment so rendered, the tlefendant now prosecutes his writ of error in this court. There is but one assignment of errors, which is, that judgment was given for a greater sum than the record shows to be justly due. The judgment is formally and properly entered up, and the party confessing it is estopped by his own voluntary act from questioning its correctness. If there be error in the computation of the interest, it is too late for him now to take advantage of it. By an act of the Legislature, approved 3d ofJuly, 1807, "judgment on confession shall be equal to a release of error." ' -There being no other assignment of errors, the judgment of the Circuit Court mud therefore be affirmed, with costs.
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.