Alexander

There are two appeals. The first is from an order refusing to recall and quash the execution and to vacate the judgment; the second from the judgment rendered against defendant after his default.

The grounds of the motion are that the judgment is void upon its face in showing no service of summons and complaint upon defendant, and that it is void for that the complaint states no cause of action.

1. Upon the summons the sheriff made the following return:

The irregularity which it is contended renders the return a nullity is the addition of the terminal letter n to the name of the defendant, L. D. McDow. The court, in its order holding the return sufficient, said: “ There is no question but that the summons was regularly served. There is but one defendant, viz., L. D. McDow, and the return shows that ‘ the defendant ’ was served with copy of complaint, although, by what is evidently a clerical error, a slip of the pen, the letter ‘ n’ is affixed to the last letter of the name ‘ McDow.’ ”

"We think the ruling and the reasons upon which it is based are both sound.

2. The complaint is in form as follows:

The test of the sufficiency of this complaint will be found in the answer to…