Paine v. Aldrich

New York Supreme Court

Paine v. Aldrich

13 N.Y.S. 455, 36 N.Y. St. Rep. 999, 59 Hun 623, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1180

DecidedFebruary 11, 1891

StatusPublished

This text of 13 N.Y.S. 455 (Paine v. Aldrich) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Paine v. Aldrich, 13 N.Y.S. 455, 36 N.Y. St. Rep. 999, 59 Hun 623, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1180 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Upon an examination of this case, it appears that it was tried before the court without a jury, and that it was an action seeking equitable relief. The court has duly made its findings of fact and conclusions of law, and thereupon it would appear from the appeal papers the clerk attempted to enter judgment by means of a postea attached to the judgment roll. The court before whom the case was tried does not appear to have directed any such judgment, and in fact this postea contains relief which the clerk seems to have concluded the parties to be entitled to, but which the court has refrained from giving them. It has been determined by this court that, in the case of a trial before a court or referee, the court or referee must settle the judgment to be entered, which is the language of the Code, and that the clerk has no power to determine whether a judgment comports with a direction to enter judgment or not. The clerk has no judicial functions and no power except to enter the judgment directed by the court or referee. Consequently the court or referee must settle the judgment, and direct that judgment to be entered; and it is not for the clerk to determine whether any paper corresponds with the judgment which the court or referee has directed to be entered. The whole proceeding seems to be absolutely irregular. The papers before us do not disclose a judgment which can be reviewed upon appeal, and the case must be stricken from the calendar.

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

Per Curiam.

Upon an examination of this case, it appears that it was tried before the court without a jury, and that it was an action seeking equitable relief. The court has duly made its findings of fact and conclusions of law, and thereupon it would appear from the appeal papers the clerk attempted to enter judgment by means of a postea attached to the judgment roll. The court before whom the case was tried does not appear to have directed any such judgment, and in fact this postea contains relief which the clerk seems to have concluded the parties to be entitled to, but which the court has refrained from giving them. It has been determined by this court that, in the case of a trial before a court or referee, the court or referee must settle the judgment to be entered, which is the language of the Code, and that the clerk has no power to determine whether a judgment comports with a direction to enter judgment or not. The clerk has no judicial functions and no power except to enter the judgment directed by the court or referee. Consequently the court or referee must settle the judgment, and direct that judgment to be entered; and it is not for the clerk to determine whether any paper corresponds with the judgment which the court or referee has directed to be entered. The whole proceeding seems to be absolutely irregular. The papers before us do not disclose a judgment which can be reviewed upon appeal, and the case must be stricken from the calendar.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 N.Y.S. 455, 36 N.Y. St. Rep. 999, 59 Hun 623, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1180, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paine-v-aldrich-nysupct-1891.