
    COLEMAN vs. HARRISON CIRCUIT COURT.
    After the firfts term fucceeding the difmiifion ofacaufeonthc rules, the parties are out of court, and cannot be heard, though to cor-red a miftake.
    See Gay vj. ■ Caldwell) ante ⅜4 ⅝
    
      January 12th.
    
    COLEMAN filed his. bill in chancery, in said court, against Holeman and others. Before the suit was set for hearing, the clerk, through mistake, entered on the rules “Dismissed by order of the complainant.” The cause was not entered on the court, docket, at the succeeding term,, amongst the office judgments, as an office dismission. At the second term after the dismission, the complainant moved to set aside the entry of dismission, and reinstate the cause ; and offered affidavits of,, the. entry being made by the clerk by mistake, and that the,, complainant and his counsel were ignorant of it until that term. That court overruled the motion ; being of opinion that the motion came to late. Exceptions were taken to the court’s opinion ; a copy of which exceptions being produced to this court, a motion, was made for a mandamus to compel that court to reinstate the cause. ■
    Talbot,for the plaintiff.
    — -Whenever the inferior tribunal refuse to act on,a subject proper .for their decision, or have no discretion in the act to jre^.done, a mandamiis will lie. Here there is no contest as to the matter of fact. The inferior court have refused to correct the mistake of their clerk, and therefore this court will compel them to do it. The act of assembly 
      , will be fpund to declare final, those office judgments only which are entered in actions of debt “ founded on a specialty, bill or note in writing, ascertaining the demand but does not extend to office dismissions. Were office dis-missions placed upon the footing pf office judgments, they should, to give them validity, be docketed with the office judgments, and entered as the judgment of the pourt in term time. This has not been done in this instance.
    
      February 11th.
    
    
      
      
         Ads of 1796-7, p. 24, § 26, x Brad-226.
    
   The Court, after having taken time, overruled the motion ; being of opinion that after the first term succeeding the entry on the rules, the parties were completely out of court, and could not be regularly brought into pourt again but by process ; and that therefore the inferior court acted correctly in overruling the motion to reinstate the cause, 
      
      
         The fame point was decided in the cafe of Cravens vs. Broadnax,, Spring term 1808.
      Jn the cafes of Penn's adm'x. vs. Emnerfon, fall term 1803, Pr, dec, 346 — - Pryor vs. Reddick, fall term 1805- — and Reed vs. Hatchery fpring term 1809, it was decided that after the term had expired at which a judgment was entered, it could not be reverted or altered by the court below.
     