
    Wallace L. De Wolf et al., Appellees, v. Marguerite Springer, Executrix, Appellant.
    Gen. No. 20,220.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. John Gibbons, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1914.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed December 22, 1914.
    Statement of the Case.
    In an action by Wallace L. DeWolf and others against Marguerite Springer, as executrix, an order entered found due from Warren Springer in his lifetime the sum of $25,000, and provided, “that judgment be and" the same is hereby entered upon said finding against the estate of said Warren Springer, deceased, and against said Marguerite Springer as executrix of the last will and testament of the said Warren Springer, deceased.” Such order was amended by striking out the words “estate of said Warren Springer, deceased,” and adding “as a claim of the seventh class to be paid in due course of administration.” The defendant appealed and questioned the power to amend such judgment subsequent to entry.
    Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Judgment, § 256
      
      —what amendment may he allowed after term. An amendment to a judgment against the estate of a person- and against the executrix of such person by striking out the words as to the estate and adding words requiring the claim “to be paid in due cpurse of administration,” makes a change in a matter of mere form and not of substance, and such amendment may be made after the term from the pleadings and files in the case and the entries in the clerk’s minute books.
    2. Executobs and adminxstbatobs, § 272*—when claim against estate may he classified in judgment. The classification of a claim against a deceased person in a judgment is a matter of form and is proper under the statutes as to the allowance of claims against estates.
    3. Judgment, § 252*—when judgment may he amended after term. Consent to the entering of a judgment against an estate goes to the substance rather than to the form of the judgment, and the court may under the statute of amendments and jeofails, correct such judgment in order to render it effective “so that it shall not be reversed and annulled.”
    Eugene M. Bumphrey, for appellant.
    George W. Wilbur, for appellees.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vois. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.  