Danielson v. Northwestern Fuel Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota

Danielson v. Northwestern Fuel Co.

55 F. 49, 1893 U.S. App. LEXIS 2528

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota

DecidedFebruary 15, 1893

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 55 F. 49 (Danielson v. Northwestern Fuel Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Danielson v. Northwestern Fuel Co., 55 F. 49, 1893 U.S. App. LEXIS 2528 (circtdmn 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

NELSON, District Judge,

(after stating the facts.) No execution could issue until a final judgment is rendered. The judgment became final at the time when the motion for a new trial was determined. See Woods v. Lindvall, 48 Fed. Rep. 73, 1 C. C. A. 34.

Although the order denying the motion for a new trial was signed by the judge in vacation, and at chambers, upon January 18, 1893, it was not effective, so that the judgment became final, until the order was filed of record in the clerk’s office in the division in which the judgment was entered, which was on January 21, 1893.

Under section 1007, Rev. St. U. S., as interpreted by the United States supreme court, (Doyle v. Wisconsin, 94 U. S. 52,) the legislative intent is to be determined by looking at the old law as it existed before the revision; and when this is done it is found that, until the expiration of the term of 10 days, “execution shall not issue in any case where a writ of error may be a supersedeas;” and the term of [50]*5010 days also excludes Sundays. See, also, Kitchen v. Randolph, 93 U. S. 86, and Danville v. Brown, 128 U. S. 503, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 149. Motion to quash execution is granted.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

NELSON, District Judge,

(after stating the facts.) No execution could issue until a final judgment is rendered. The judgment became final at the time when the motion for a new trial was determined. See Woods v. Lindvall, 48 Fed. Rep. 73, 1 C. C. A. 34.

Although the order denying the motion for a new trial was signed by the judge in vacation, and at chambers, upon January 18, 1893, it was not effective, so that the judgment became final, until the order was filed of record in the clerk’s office in the division in which the judgment was entered, which was on January 21, 1893.

Under section 1007, Rev. St. U. S., as interpreted by the United States supreme court, (Doyle v. Wisconsin, 94 U. S. 52,) the legislative intent is to be determined by looking at the old law as it existed before the revision; and when this is done it is found that, until the expiration of the term of 10 days, “execution shall not issue in any case where a writ of error may be a supersedeas;” and the term of [50]*5010 days also excludes Sundays. See, also, Kitchen v. Randolph, 93 U. S. 86, and Danville v. Brown, 128 U. S. 503, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 149. Motion to quash execution is granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 F. 49, 1893 U.S. App. LEXIS 2528, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/danielson-v-northwestern-fuel-co-circtdmn-1893.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack