Case ID: misc_127/html/0149-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Josephine A. McIntyre, Appellant, v. Inez Borrero, Respondent.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    April 15, 1926.
    Judgments — entry — Municipal Court Code, § 125 (as amd. by Laws of 1923, chap. 769), requires attorney appearing for party in whose favor judgment is rendered to enter judgment — date of entry changed so as to permit appeal.
    The judgment herein, prepared and delivered to the clerk, without notice, by the attorney for the party against whom the judgment was rendered, was improperly entered, since such practice is not in compliance with section 125 of the Municipal Court Code (as amd. by Laws of 1923, chap. 769), providing that where the party in whose favor judgment is rendered appears by an attorney, said attorney shall prepare the judgment.
    The date of entry should be changed so as to permit a review of the judgment by the appellate court.
    Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Ninth District, denying plaintiff’s motion to change date of entry of judgment.
    
      Francis A. O’ Neill, for the appellant.
    
      Bijur & Herts [Harry Bijur of counsel], for the respondent.
   Per Curiam.

It being a necessary inference from the 1923 amendment of section 125 of the Municipal Court Code (Laws of 1923, chap. 769) that where the party in whose favor judgment is rendered appears by an attorney such attorney shall prepare the judgment, the judgment in this instance, prepared and delivered to the clerk, without notice, by the attorney for the party against whom the judgment was rendered, was improperly entered. It follows under the rule laid down in Maisch v. City of New York (134 App. Div. 201) that in the interests of justice the court should order a change of the date of the entry of the judgment, so as to permit a review of such judgment by the appellate court.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs, and motion granted to the extent of changing the date of the entry of judgment to April 15, 1926.

Lydon and Levy, JJ., concur; Burnt, J., taking no part.