Barthrop v. Tucker

Citations

• 29 Wash. 666
• 70 P. 120
• 1902 Wash. LEXIS 627

Syllabus

<p>JUDGMENTS-DATE OF RENDITION-NUNC FEO TUNC ENTRY-LIMITATION AGAINST REVIVAL.</p> <p>Where a judgment was actually announced by the court, hut was not signed and eiuered until nearly two years subsequently, when a nunc pro tunc order was made, the bar of the statute against revival began to run from the former date (Quareles v. Seattle, 26 Wash. 226, distinguished).</p> <p>SAME — EFFECT OF ENTRY — POWER OF COURT TO RESTRICT.</p> <p>The court in making a nunc pro tunc order showing that a judgment was actually rendered upon a former date cannot in such order declare that the judgment shall take effect from the former date for some purposes, hut that for all other purposes it shall take effect as of the date of signing the judgment, since the effect to he given to judgments is prescribed by law.</p>