Putman v. Van Allen
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Fulton County Court, affirming a judgment of a Justices’s Court, in favor of respondent and against appellant, for costs, five dollars and twenty-five cents. It does not appear, what the action was for._ It was tried before a jury, who rendered a verdict for the defendant, and it seems to have been a ease where the costs could not exceed five dollars besides the fees of witnesses attending from another county.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Fulton County Court, affirming a judgment of a Justices’s Court, in favor of respondent and against appellant, for costs, five dollars and twenty-five cents. It does not appear, what the action was for._ It was tried before a jury, who rendered a verdict for the defendant, and it seems to have been a ease where the costs could not exceed five dollars besides the fees of witnesses attending from another county. Section 3015 of the Code Civil Procedure, provides, that where a verdict is rendered by a jury the justice must forthwith render judgment, and enter it in…
1Opinion of the Court
Williams, <7.:
The section of the Code of Civil Procedure (3015), requires the justice forthwith to render the judgment, cmd enter it in his docket book. Here are two acts; the one has been held to be a judicial act, the rendering of the judgment, and the other a ministeral act, the entering the judgment in the docket book. {Fish v. Emerson, 44 N. Y., 376.) If the judicial act is performed, the failure jiroperly to perform the ministeral act will not render the judgment void. (Same case.) The real question here is, therefore, whether the judicial act was performed as required, whether the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Fish v. . EmersonNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Stephens v. SanteeNew York Supreme Court · 1868
- Christopher v. Van LiewNew York Supreme Court · 1869