Groton Bridge & Mfg. Co. v. Clark Pressed Brick Co.

Citations

• 136 F. 27
• 68 C.C.A. 577
• 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4409

Syllabus

<p>1. Judgment — Entry Nunc Pro Tunc.</p> <p>Where the clerk of a court of record fails to enter up judgment in full, in fact ordered by the court, at the proper time, the judgment may be amended by the court at a subsequent term, so as to express the order formerly made, either on motion or sua sponte.</p> <p>2. Same — Notice to Parties — Collateral Attack.</p> <p>Where such nunc pro tunc entry is made at a subsequent term, based on the certain knowledge of the judge of the court, prior notice thereof to the parties is not essential, so as to render the amended judgment amenable to attack in a collateral proceeding.</p> <p>3. Same — Res Adjudicata.</p> <p>Where, to an action based on a contract for the sale and delivery of brick, the defendant appears and files answer and a counterclaim in the same plea, alleging a breach of the contract claimed by the defendant to have been entered into by the parties, and then bases on such allegations a counterclaim for damages resulting from the alleged breach by the plaintiff, and, when the case is called for trial, fails to appear, and leaves his plea on record without withdrawing it, thereby imposing upon the plaintiff the production of proof to establish its cause of action, and the court proceeds on the evidence to find the issues for the plaintiff on the pleadings, the judgment therein constitutes an estoppel against a subsequent action brought by the defendant in another jurisdiction based on the same state of facts set up in the counterclaim.</p> <p>Even if the court rendering such judgment, on the failure of the defendant to appear at the trial, should ha.ve treated the counterclaim as withdrawn, its failure to do so would, at the most, have been only an irregularity in proceeding, and did not render the judgment liable to attack as void in a collateral proceeding.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>