Bach v. Dawson

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “[W]hether a document is a[n] . . . order or a ‘judgment’ [is] . . . determined not by [its] title, but by its contents.”
• “As these sections are akin to a statute of limitations of an enforceable judgment, what constitutes a ‘judgment’ should be based on a final, appealable (and hence, enforceable) order in the case.”
• “As a judgment must function by its character as a final determination of the parties’ rights in a lawsuit, whether a document is a court order or a ‘judgment’ has long been held to be determined not by the document’s title, but by its contents.”
• “As a judgment must function by its character as a final determination of the parties’ rights in a lawsuit, whether a document is a court order or a ‘judgment’ has long been held to be determined not by the document’s title, but by its contents.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).