In Re Washington & Georgetown Railroad

Citations

• 140 U.S. 91
• 11 S. Ct. 673
• 35 L. Ed. 339
• 1891 U.S. LEXIS 2438

Syllabus

<p>A judgment in an action of tort, for damages and costs, was rendered in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, at special term. It was affirmed by the general term, with costs. The latter judgment was affirmed by this court, with costs. Nothing was said about interest in either o? the tln-ee judgments. On the presentation of the mandate of this court to the general term, it entered a judgment for the payment of the judgment of tlie special term, with interest on it at the rate of six per cent per annum from the time it was originally rendered. Held, that the judgment on the mandate should have followed the judgment of this court and not have allowed interest.</p> <p>As the amount of the interest was not large enough to warrant a writ of error, the proper remedy was by mandamus, there being no other adequate remedy, and there being no discretion to be exercised by the inferior court.</p> <p>This court does not decide whether a judgment founded on tort bears or ought-to bear interest, in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, from the date of its rendition.</p> <p>The fact that the judgment of this court merely affirmed the judgment of the general term with costs, and said nothing about interest, is to be taken as a declaration of this court-that, upon the record as presented to it, no interest was to be allowed.</p> <p>A mandamus was issued to the general term, commanding it to vacate its judgment so far as concerned the interest, and to enter a judgment on the mandate, affirming its prior judgment, with costs, without more.</p>