
    R. B. Houston v. J. M. Morrison.
    Whore the indorsements of credits, upon the noto sued on, disclosed that the verdict was for one hundred dollars more than was duo, and there was nothing in the statement of facts to sustain the verdict, this court reversed the judgment of the court below, refusing to grant a new trial. (Note 1.)
    Appeal from De Witt.
    
      A. II. Phillips, for appellant.
   LipscOMB. J.

This suit was brought by the appellee against the appellant on a note of hand. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for four hundred and forty-four dollars and ninety-two cents. There was a motion fon a new trial on the ground that the jury liad found in favor of the plaintiff foa a larger amount than the evidence authorized. The motion was overruled! ■and defendant, appealed. 1

There were several credits indorsed upon the note. When those credit! were deducted, it left a balance of only three hundred and eight dollars an! sixteen cents. The verdict was, then, for one hundred and thirty-six dollar! ■and seventy-six cents more than the evidence authorized. A new trial ougbl to have been granted on the motion of the defendant in the court below! Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

Beversed and remanded.

Note 1. — In the assessment of damages, on judgment by default, the clerk must allow all credits indorsed upon the note sued on. (Holland v. Cook, post 244.)  